Slashdot Mirror
Caffeine vs Type II Diabetes
OctaneZ writes "New research out of the Harvard School of Public Health indicates that coffee may lower your risk of Type II Diabetes. Men who drank 6 cups of coffee a day lowered their risk by 50%, while womens risk dropped 30%. The release also includes audio discussions about the suprising findings."
That's super news!
Being that there's coffee in Kahlua I can rest assured that when I have cirrhosis induced jaundice I won't have to suffer through the ravages of Type II diabetes!
oh.. there are only 2 Fs in "Caffeine", Taco. Please get it right when you dupe the story in 2 hours.
Trolling is a art,
break out the red bull, and drink to your health
"Yay, my lame-ass caffeine 'addiction', that I brag about and wear like a badge of sorry dorkiness, is actually helping my fat-ass sedentary lifestyle!!@"
Ignoring, of course, the fact that while drinking 6 (!!) cups of coffee a day may reduce your risk of Type 2 diabetes (if this resarch is true), it raises your risk for nearly everything else.
men's risk of heart-attack raised 70% and woman's height decreased 25%
I'll drink to that!
One small shot of espresso for man,
One 5-shot Venti White Chocolate Mocha for mankind!
Waiter! I'll have two please!
-Goran
Carpe Scrotum - The only way to deal with your competition.
I wonder if it's because those who drank a lot of coffee throughout the day consumed less refined sugar. Many put some sugar in their coffee, but if they're getting a boost in energy from the coffee maybe they lay off the snacks.
Developers: We can use your help.
But caffeine also seems to make you jjjittery and ttype lettters multiple timess.
it was the coffee, not the caffeine, that provided the benefits. decafe works too.
The statistics were probably skewed from their hearts exploding after beating like a hummingbird on meth.
Really, what is the raiton between the risk of cardio injury from drinking this much coffee and the risk of getting diabetes in general? I would htink that cardiovascular disease would be a bigger threat than diabetes. (If I had to pick I would rather go with the cardiovascular disease but neither are nice)
And was the regular coffee or my double brewed boiled down recipie where I fit two pots into one cup?
There is nothing wrong with being gay. It's getting caught where the trouble lies.
6 cups of coffee per day? Could it be because they're rail thin, twitchy freaks who burn off all their excess calories by fidgeting constantly?
Insulin resistance seems to be correlated with obesity. I'm not saying you can't be fat and drink coffee... but most of the "looks like a crack addict with his coffee fix" people I know are thin.
Your chance of getting diabetes drops by 50% by your chance of getting heart disease increases by 50%.
Drinking a quart of saturated oil reduces your risk of dry skin by 50% by has other rathy nasty health affects.
What a crock of shit Slashdot is with their bullshit "news". I wish I was a Muslim terrorist at times like these...
Men who drank 6 cups of coffee a day lowered their risk by 50%
I drink so much coffee, the people around me must have a lowered risk of diabetes, just by proximity.
Software Wars
Tough choice. I think I'll go for the latter...
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Of course, this is not a formal medical observation AT ALL but I am type II diabetic and I am also a fan of the Dr. Atkins diet (you know, eat a side of beef every day...LOSE WEIGHT!). Adkins doesn't like caffine and I went on it first and skipped my 10-soda-a-day-habit. (Diet, of course.) I went off of it and back on with soda (more moderate, but still a lot) and still lost weight and my diabetes numbers improved even more than they were. I have to wonder now reading the new research.
Does drinking 6 cups of coffee a day reduce Type II diabetes
OR
Does drinking 6 cups of coffee a day supress hunger so people eat less, and therefore weigh less, which reduces the chance of Type II diabetes?
In my head, it's more the latter than any "wonder of coffee" - kind of like how a few years ago it was "red wine reduces heart attacks! Drink up, kids!", which then moved to "oh, well, grape juice does the same thing - it's all because of the antioxidants".
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
...there'll probably be even newer research which shows that caffeine is likely to double your chances of type II diabetes
If it's too difficult, I can't understand it !
I don't think it's wise to increase coffee intake just for the reduced diabetes risk. Besides, there's other healthier things one can do to reduce the risk, like (heaven forbid) better diet and exercise habits.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
Would all the caffine make your heart rate etc increase means that you burn energy quicker and therefor maybe making the body just that little bit fitter. Of course sitting down all day would undo it Rus
CPanel + Root from $35/mo - 10% off with discount code SLASHDOT
Cafffeine eh? The editor has had a few to many cups of cofffee me thinks
So, it's good for you! Drink up!
The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
I always find these studies funny. The actual reason is that most of them are dead from caffene poisioning before they get diabetes.
...and in a further study, the same researchers determined that ingesting two teaspoons of drain cleaner reduced the likelihood of old age related illnesses.
I am hypoglycemic and one thing that really straightens out my blood sugar/insulin is caffeine. When drinking coffee it's a lot more stable and doesn't fluctuate nearly as bad.
Some claim caffeine helps for Parkinsons disease too
"New research out of the Harvard Schoool of Public Healthindicates that cofffee may lower your risk of Type III Diabetes. Men who drank 6 cups of cofffee a day lowered their risk by 50%, while womens risk droppped 30%. The release also includes audio discusssions about the surprising findings."
I seem to recall a slashdot story from about a year ago that claimed that drinking so much caffeine caused your testicles to shrink.
Aren't there other, more healthy ways to lower your risk of diabetes? Like exercise and eating right? Or is that one of those "things you are not allowed to say" on slashdot?
"If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid." - Epictetus
Coffee will reduce it IF you dont have 6 pounds of sugar, choclate syrup and other carbohydrates in it.
black coffee is the best, but reducing your carbohydrate intake along with it makes the biggest difference.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
One thing to note is that a lot of the reports I read saying that coffee leads to diabetes type 2 also imply that the coffee is consumed together with some kind of carbohydrate-laced food, usually cakes or something. It is also equally important to note that there are a large number of athletes and serious exercisers who use coffee as a performance enhancer; they tend to not have diabetes type 2 and they tend not to consume their coffee with performance-undermining cakes.
What I would like to see are more reports taking these factors into account.Compare people who drink just coffee with people who drink coffee and eat cake. Compare people who drink coffee and exercise vigorously on a regular basis with people who drink coffee and sit on the couch all day. Let's get rid of all the double-messages and ambiguities.
People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
Wow, this is the first time I've heard something both on the radio and on /. but heard it on the radio first...
Does it say anything for how much sugar you put in your BONUS cu. . I mean coffee??
How Now Brown Cow
Why haven't they referred to this as the "Geek Effect?" Men who drink more than 6 cups of coffee a day are at LEAST 50% likely to be geeks of some form, and women about 30%. Coincidenza?
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
The caffeine may help but all the other crap in Red Bull won't, especially the 10 tons of sugar per can.
I never know. Is this the cups as measured on the side of my coffee pot (presumably some sort of cooking measurement), or... six cups as the normal mugs that I drink (typically two of the former sort of cups..)
Anyone?
Side effects of caffeine include:
Anger is perhaps the symptom I've seen the most in other people. It's due to the fact that caffeine causes the adrenal glands to dump their load--you feel energized by caffeine specifically because you've gotten an adrenaline rush. But andrenaline also causes anger because it brings on the "fight or flight" syndrome. Therefore one of the worst places to work is in a place with lots of caffine addicts--they tend to get on each others' nerves.
Caffine causes other stress hormones to be released. The net effect is that you end up feeling tired because you've been feeling stressed out by caffeine. Most people end up taking caffeine to deal with caffeine's side effects.
It takes two weeks for caffeine to completely leave your body.
it is "womens'" not "womens"
I'd have trouble contracting diabetes too, if my HEAD EXPLODED FROM TOO MUCH COFFEE.
Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
I have a blazing headache because I'm trying to cut down on my coffee drinking after reading the recent article!
"It is also equally important to note that there are a large number of athletes and serious exercisers who use coffee as a performance enhancer; they tend to not have diabetes type 2"
A serious exerciser or athelete is in better shape and more thoughtful about their health in general than most people, of course they will have less type 2 diabetes.
"This is good news for coffee drinkers, however it doesn't mean everyone should run out for a latte," said Frank Hu, senior author of the study ...
...".
Yeah; that milk is bad for ya; stick to the straight coffee and you'll be fine.
Seriously; I read the report looking for clues that for the usual sorts of problems. Did they have cause and effect straightened out? Did they really show it was related to the caffeine? Could you get the same effect by drinking (warm) water?
They did mention decaf having a lesser effect. But there are more differences than just caffeine level. The decaffeination processes all remove a variety of the more highly-soluble compounds, so any of them could be the explanation.
Maybe it's the caffeine. Maybe it's some other compound that's about as soluble as caffeine. Maybe it's the ritual of the warm drink. Maybe it's the heat of the coffee.
Some time back, I read an observation that the most important part of any scientific paper is the paragraph near the end that starts with "Further study is needed
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
The study just compared caffeinated coffee drinkers to non-coffee drinkers. Maybe those non-coffee drinkers were drinking 12-paks of Mountain Dew. Jumping to conclusions is bad science.
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
I'm endlessly amused by scientific studies stating that something is good or bad for you. It changes every other week. My favorite example was the whole metabolife (and other diet pills) scandals which were going on and on about people taking metabolife were having higher than usual percentage of strokes. Hello folks! Look at the people taking metabolife! They're the same ones putting back two or three whoppers and a big mac or two every week! They already weighed 600 pounds, and they were going to have a stroke anyway. They'd have probably had a stroke if they climbed on an excercise bike and got their meaty heart rate up over 120. What is this world coming to? I'm having starting to think John Titor is right. I can't take it no more! Pablo
http://www.cgff.net/comics.html
"... Men who drank 6 cups of coffee a day lowered their risk by 50% ..."
Since I drink a few pots a day + pepsi that means I have somewhere around -200% risk and my blood may be used to treat Diabetes no?
"I drink so much coffee, the people around me must have a lowered risk of diabetes, just by proximity"
you increase their risk of anxiety...
"Aren't there other, more healthy ways to lower your risk of diabetes? Like exercise and eating right?"
Hey, this is the USA, does that exercise/eating right thing come in pill form?
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
is that Coffee appears to lower your risk for Type II Diabetes....not caffine. They explicitly say that it may be the antioxidents in coffee that are responsible. So, put down the Mountain Dew.
Kind thoughts do not change the world
Victim of not being caffeinated enough, apparently.
Doesn't coke soft-drinks include caffeine in its formula ? :-)
I don't drink coffee as often as I drink coke.
I am Cornholio! I need tp for my bunghole! Bung-bung-bunghole. Hehehehehehe. Bunghole! Bunghole! Bunghole!
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
hmmmm.... another of the 'research has shown something we thought BAD for you can actually be GOOD!' stories. ie. mobile phones - cook your brain but can actually increase reaction times! (this is why I tape my mobile to my head when bobsleighing) I think we could just get rid of a lot of this with the statement 'everything in moderation' I've always drunk lots off tea/coffee/caffeinated soda's, but didn't stop me getting type I several years ago....
Great now I can switch from tasty-kakes to Little Debbies, drink MORE coffee and Mountain Dew, and code till my heart pops out of my chest like some alien war beast. I mean if an alkaloid like caffiene is soo gooood for me hten I should switch to crack
I wish they did some real research. because Diabetes is a real killer. Basically a fatal disease.
BTW do I get code royalties when my heart explodes?
--Shaddup and support your local PBS station Plan for it
I used to work at a "convenience store", and an awful lot of builders/plumbers/roofers/etc. also drink tons of coffee.
I don't know how they do it...my stomach starts hurting if I drink a cup three mornings in a row.
I could kill you, sure, but I could only make you cry with these words
Men who drank 6 cups of coffee a day lowered their risk by 50%, while womens risk dropped 30%.
6 cups a day?! If the test-subjects die from a heart-attack before diabetes can get them, does that really mean their risk has been lowered?
I just tried to make myself a cup of coffee, but the coffee machine is not working. It seems slow... very slow...
/. my machine! Damn yous!
Hey wait. You can't
You are more than the sum of what you consume. Desire is not an occupation.
I drink six cups of coffee before before I'm finished watching the morning news. What I want to know is: Am I avoiding more problems than I'm creating by drinking six pots of coffee per day?
So what about those of us that dump tons of sugar in their coffee? Would that negate the whole thing?
;)
C'mon, I can't be the only one here who has been asked if they want some coffee with their sugar and cream.
"I wish I was a Muslim terrorist at times like these..."
The Justice Dept is subpoenaing Slashdot for their secret log files of anonymous commentators. A black helicoptor is on it's way to your home.
The problem is that I've worked hard over the past 4 years to decrease my coffe intake from two pots a day to one cup a day. So much wasted effort! Ah well, it's never too late to salvage an addiction.
"Extremism in defense of liberty is more fun."
A while back some scientist found out
that chocolate was good for your teeth.
I wonder how much of this research Nestle
has been financing.
The source of financing should go right between the title and the abstract on all papers.
Maybe the reason people who drink 6 cups of coffee have a lower T2 Diabetes risk is because after having that much freaking caffiene they can't hold still.
Seriously. 6 cups? Some people I know would have to run the Los Angeles Marathon to work off those jitters.
I'll tell you why coffee helps prevent diabetes and maybe with weight loss, after 6 cups of coffee a day you'll be spending most of your day walking back and forth to the bathroom and straining your bladder during meetings. There's your exercise.
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
I heard the same thing on NPR yesterday on the news. However, the story I heard only claimed this was a correlation between people who drink coffee and not causation. Scientists found definite figures that coffee drinkers had a lowered risk of type II diabetes, but that no evidence linked it to the coffee.
I'd start listening to the audio links and do research, but I'm stuck at this place called My Job and if anyone else can confirm this I'd appreciate it. The link given is not the official paper with its findings and I'm not sure I trust the person who wrote it.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
This study is so flawed it's laughable. During the course of the study, the AMA changed the definition of Diabetis, or didn't they bother to consider that fact?
The change in definition is the single most contributing factor to the "Diabetis Epidemic" that we have heard reported on.
Sorry, throw this story on the trash pile with the rest of the garbage.
Men who drank 6 cups of coffee a day lowered their risk by 50%
So my first born's first born has had his (assuming 'he') risk lowered by 99% given my current daily intake....
Comparing it to Windows will be a moot point, since El Dorado is going to have a 40% larger code base than XP.
Caffeinated beverages are an appetite suppressant and a metabolism stimulant. I would have to believe that men drinking 6 cups of coffee per day are likely not overweight, and thus not very susceptable to type II diabetes.
However, high caffeine intake has other problems: impotence being one of them.
I drink quite a bit of coffee and I still got Type II diabetes.
Of course, anyone who is drinking SIX cups of coffee per day, is probably too hyper to sit on their butt programming all day long.
Yeah, if he'd eaten differently he would never have fallen on the ice.
Atkins diet. Jeebus H. Christ. I swear if i hear that phrase one more time I'm going to lose it. It's everywhere. Menu's at resturaunts have "Atkins Friendly" sections now.
Whatever ever happened to a balanced diet? Atkins seems to me to be swinging the pendulum more and more away from equilibrium.
Pop culture diets: "Eat no carbs!" "Wait! You need carbs!" "Eat nothing but carbs!" "Wait, carbs are bad!" "Eat only protien!" "Eat anything but barf it up!"
rant not directed towards you, neiffer. just a rant. whatever to get your diabetes in control. People with a medical condition, maybe something like Atkins is a good thing. but for people who think they are fat, and don't want to excercise, a little more balance would seem better.
Men who drank 6 cups of coffee a day lowered their risk (of Type II Diabetes) by 50%, while womens risk dropped 30%. The release also includes audio discussions about the suprising findings.
...Therefore, it can logically be concluded that to avoid Type II Diabetes, I only need to drink 30 cans of Mountain Dew a day!
Hmm...my doc said if I don't stop drinking pop, I'll develop Type II Diabetes, so I better figure out a way to prevent that from happening. Now, I'm not a coffee drinker myself, but hey! There's caffeine in Mountain Dew as well, and I love Mountain Dew! So, let's see here, five cans have as much caffeine as one cup of coffee...
Piece of cake...and my doc says I'm drinking too much pop! Pfff...Shows what he says! I'm not drinking enough!
Good to see this pointed out. I would hate for someone to forget that anyone who isn't Dr. Atkins never dies.
So all you bloated soda drinkers can stop rejoicing.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
It's not the caffeine that works against Diabetes, it's a specific acid found in Coffee, even decaf supposedly works just as well.
Dude, if you are not hallucinating by 11AM, then it is time for another cup of coffee. BTW, I am talking strong-as-shit-highly-caffeinated light roast American coffee. None of that "tastes strong" shit from Europe.
Comparing it to Windows will be a moot point, since El Dorado is going to have a 40% larger code base than XP.
So we're saying that this person should merely switch to coffee instead of quitting caffeine altogether?
(Granted it is better for him/her as they are reducing their empty calories and sugar, but I thought the point of the question was to quit caffeine).
Adopting a vegitarian diet has been shown to drop the level of Diabetes type 1 and 2 to almost zero.
In several cultures where eating meat and heavily processed goods is rare the level of Diabetes is exceptionally low. Almost to the point of nonexistence. These same racial groups when exposed to the typical North American diet sow identical rates to other North Americans eating the same foods.
If you are really concerned about Diabetes then you shouldn't drink more coffee to stave it off. Don't eat meat or animal products.
Simple really.
The mantra of the statistician and researchers:
Correlation does not equal causation.
Is it caffeine? Is it coffee? If it was caffeine, would it make sense to do more tests on other caffeine laden beverages? Tea, for example. But wait, maybe tea has some effects to help against diabetes too. Hmm...caffeinated soft drinks. But maybe in sodas, the effects will cancel each other out because of the high-fructose corn syrup, if, caffeine is indeed the factor.
Coffee and tea both have "lots of antioxidants" does that mean they are both good against diabetes? Is that what it means? lots of antioxidants = anti-diabetic?
Now who the fuck funds these harvard studies? Is it harvard alone or is Starbucks behind all of this?
And 6 cups a day? What are you nuts? I know people that drink one, two maybe three coffees a day but 6?
well....if 6 cups does this. Just imagine what a whole pot will do :) I can hear it now.
Usually the point of doing studies like this is to eliminate independent variables like that. I'm sure that in addition to questions like "How much coffee do you drink in a day?", there were questions like "What is your average daily sugar consumption?" and "How many soft drinks do you drink in a day?"
Most of the time, the hardest part in conducting any experiment is identifying and eliminating all the independent variables (except for the one you're trying to test, of course). In the case of Diabetes, sugar intake is a pretty obvious one.
Actually, some runners drink coffee before racing to improve their running times. Check this link for example.
"Until you do what you believe in, how do you know whether you believe in it or not?" -- Leo Tolstoy
Instead of drinking sugar filled sodas, your drinking coffee instead...
Take a look at that can of soda and the ammount of sugar you just ingested.
Now you wonder why peoples pancreases just up and quit or freak out and start producing huge ammounts of incelin.
If we cut the refined sugars out of our diets, we'd be doing ourselves a favor!
Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
s-ssso ddriiinkinng theesse 12 ccupps of cofffffee shoullldd mmmake meee innvvullnerrrrrrable to diabbbbbbbbbbbeteess!!!!!
I'm looking California... but feeling Minnesota...
I wonder, 6 cups of no-flavour-lot-coffeine how much espresso or moka cups are? ... I can't see all this problems here (italy) although nearly everyone drinks coffee at least twice a day.
Coffee is really a tragedy in US, judging from comments
Probably abusing less from filter coffee and start using moka could lighten the coffee addiction problem. Or moka is diffuse also there? Just wondering, I'm quite curious about foregin food folklore.
sfbe -- dasnake
Although the research came from Havard, I wonder if the coffee trilateral commission (Starbucks, Folger's and Maxwell House) paid for it. Or am I paranoid? Or is it the six cups talking?
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Caffeine stimulates the release of FFAs (in fact, athletes sometimes use caffeine in the hopes that their bodies will burn glucose later in the exercise cycle), so it's likely that the researchers were expecting to see some kind of positive correlation between caffeine intake and diabetes. This suggests that either the diabetes-FFA relationship needs to be re-examined, or else caffeine is playing another role that overshadows its FFA-release activity.
- Watchful Babbler (who forgot his password)
Make fun of Atkins all you like, but for those of us that have type II diabetes, it's a powerful tool to control our blood sugar. I've lost enough weight on Atkins that my sugar readings are "normal" as long as I stick to the diet. If I eat more than about 20 grams of carbs at one sitting, or about 45 - 50 grams a day, my blood sugar goes way up. Studies have shown that good sugar control postpones and reduces the onset of diabetic complications. Basicly, the carbs kill diabetics faster than the fat & cholesterol.
Many people mistake Atkins induction level with the "atkins diet". Induction is a 2 week phase. It is not a balanced diet, and you're not supposed to stay on it forever. Atkins at maintenance levels resembles The Zone diet.
Hey gang,
I think it's important to point out that nowhere does the article say that it's caffeine that is lowering the chance of Type 2 Diabeties. They do say it's the coffee, and most likely other elements of the coffee.
"Coffee (both regular and decaffeinated) has lots of antioxidants like chlorogenic acid (one of the compounds responsible for the coffee flavor) and magnesium. These ingredients can actually improve sensitivity to insulin and may contribute to lowering risk of type 2 diabetes."
So, while for some people coffee and caffeine are synonomous, please keep in mind that a 2 liter of Mt. Dew is NOT going to help you fight diabeties.
~D
This sig has been enciphered with a one-time pad. It could say almost anything.
Folks, six cups of coffee seems a little extreme. Seriously. Two, maybe three is reasonable, one per phase of the day. Six you're putting much more serious health risks into play than Diabetes.
Funny side note, when my dad was a travelling salesman (before my birth) he aparently got addicted to coffee from being on the road. He didn't really realize it, until he literally had heart palpatations, went to the doctor, who told him he had OD'd on caffeine. So the next time he went out he counted the number of times he got coffee - 23. He said he never even noticed how much coffee he was drinking.
But at least he doesn't have diabetes.
They failed to mention the 80% of the test group who had stomach ulcers due to over consumption of coffee.
The researchers also found that for men, those who drank more than six cups of caffeinated coffee per day reduced their risk for type 2 diabetes by more than 50 percent compared to men in the study who didn't drink coffee.
Six cups of coffee contain a total of 810mg of Caffeine. That's the same as 14 Mountian Dews. If you're drinking 6 cups of coffee a day, you won't get diabetes because you'll be dead of a heart attack at age 35!
Add to that the idea that folks who work with their brain are less likely to contract Altzheimer's, and that I don't eat entire large pizza's in one setting anymore, I might live to a ripe old age after all.
Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
Diabetes I is low in certain developing countries not because of better diet, but because of poverty. People with diabetes I were left to die, usually because they/their family couldn't afford the treatment (or diagnosis for that matter), and thus diabetes I gets slowly removed from the gene pool.
People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
NOT TO MENTION that this is irresponsible journalism.
...well, that's what the story implied, right?
.02
Let me explain.
TYPE II DIABETES (DIABETES MELLITUS) is non-insulin dependent diabetes. IN other words, this is the diabetes that one could get by being a complete FAT ASS and not doing anything about it. Yes, it's true....if you're a serious FAT ASS and keep eating those jelly donuts, you have a great chance of developing DIABETES MELLITUS. Not a big deal, though, as most people can adjust this by taking an insulin pill per day.
BUT NOW, you can PREVENT having to get to the point of taking that pill by drinking 6 cups of coffee per day. That's great! Now, fat asses, drink 6 cups of coffee per day and you won't ever have to worry about this.
Let's talk about what 6 cups of coffee per day could do to you, though.
Caffeine is a diuretic...i.e. it makes you piss. Drinking coffee (or caffeine in any delivery system) is not in and of itself unhealthy. BUT 6 cups a day means that you have a drinking problem....no, not THAT kind of drinking problem, but the kind where you actually NEED to be drinking something. I have this problem myself when I go out to bars...IF I have a beer in my hand, I end up killing it. It's a social thing, not an alcoholic thing...so I switched to water and I was able to drive home without killing anyone.
BUT I DIGRESS...
The thing is, if you're drinking 6 cups of Joe a day, you're not drinking water, so you're probably chronically dehydrated. This leads to other more serious problems, #1 of which is...confusion. # 2 of which could be kidney problems...
not to mention that 6 cups of Joe will probably give you hypertension. Not to mention that if you're a FAT ASS you already have hypertension...so this is making it worse.
PLUS, have you ever been NEAR someone that drinks 6 cups of Joe a day? They start to SMELL like coffee...and not the nice smell when you open the new can of FOLGERS, either...it's AWFUL.
So...if you want to perpetuate your FAT ASS status, drink 6 cups a day. I'd suggest alternating 1 cup coffe 1 cup water, though. IT will make you think better, smell better, and probably feel better.
Just my
The Harvard researchers have been following well over 100,000 health professionals for many years now. The participants provide the researchers with detailed reports on weight, fitness level, lifestyle, exercise, diet, and illness. While I wouldn't necessarily infer causality (it _might_ not be the coffee that reduces the risk of Type II Diabetes), there is certainly a very solid correlation between drinking lots of coffee and not coming down with diabetes.
One more thing: The headline was highly misleading. The press release clearly states that there is also a benefit from decaffeinated coffee, although it seems to be less beneficial than caffeinated coffee. So don't think you need to double your Jolt intake or stock up on Penguin Mints. It's the coffee that's possibly helping you, not the caffeine.
Maybe I'm just jealous because I quit caffeine for New Years after 25 years hooked on the stuff. That headache will be fading any day now. At least I sure hope it will.
...Nothing interesting here. Just move along...
There actually is a pretty good rationale for low carb dieting. I'll try to sum up two major lines of evidence:
First, carbs didn't make up a large part of the human diet until the invention of agriculture about 10,000 years ago. Sugars and starchs are simply not available in large consistenet quantities to hunter/gatherers dominant for the previous 90,000 years. Studies comparing the remains of pre-agricultural people and agricultural people show that diabetes and heart disease only appear in populations once agriculture is introduced. The correlation was shown not to be an effect of lifespan. today, cultures such as the Inuit exist on nearly carb free diets and show a similar absence of diabetes and heart disease.
Second, carbs are nearly instantaneously converted to glucose by the digestive system. Where the digestive system easily discards unneeded fat and protein, glucose enters the blood stream very quickly. Excessively high glucose levels are toxic to the brain, so glucose triggers an insulin response. Insulin triggers the fat cells to remove glucose and store it, and it triggers the liver to remove glucose and store it as cholesterol. By removing the carb component of the diet, the body needs to produce its own glucose. The glycogen response triggers the fat cells to release stored glucose into the blood stream and it triggers the liver to convert cholesterol to glucose. Low carb dieting causes the body to spend most time in a glycogenic state, which means the body is burning fat and cholesterol as fuel. Hence, less fat and cholesterol.
You're right: correlation does not prove causation. But the other part of the scientific method is that we use correlation to verify a hypothesis about causation. Correlation studies that may lend creedence to a theory are often the only way to do longitudinal medical research. Are you going to volunteer to spend he next 20 years in a perfectly-controlled lab?
--
Long-term effects of Bush deficits
Well, to be honest, the concept of the "balanced diet" in modern nutrition is over-focused on carbs. If you read the full Adkins diet, the point of it is to eventually balanced the number of carbs in our diets, but at dramatically lower levels than the traditional Western diet, which is overdominated with carbs.
to make decafe, you essentially wash the caffeine out of the beans. during that process, you'd tend to also lose part of the antioxidants. thus, not quite as good.
but the title of this whole submission says caffeine - which is not the point of the study.
Who the hell do you think you are complaining that we coffee drinkers are angry! Why don't you get off your FSCKING high horse, you god-damned pissant. You can take your whiney little opinions about angry coffee drinkes and stick them where the sun doesn't shine! Bloody health food eating, toad sucking, argument for post-natal abortion.
I don't know how much sugar you put in your coffee, but I somehow doubt it's as much as the 170 calories worth of high fructose corn syrup you get from a can of Coke.
A lot of people get their caffeine from soda. Perhaps this has something to do with it?
The enemies of Democracy are
Interestingly, caffeine also seems to have a neuroprotective effect when it comes to Parkinson's (here's an article even the most java-addled ./er should be able to get through).
Also interesting: nicotine has an even stronger neuroprotective effect against Parkinson's. And what's really weird: smokers metabolize caffeine about twice as fast as nonsmokers (nobody's really sure why). Next time your pretentious smoker buddy starts bragging about how much coffee he cranks, you might mention this. He's got a biochemical advantage.
I don't smoke, and I wouldn't advise doing it as part of your health regimen, but nicotine's interations with caffeine are kind of intriguing.
Mom? Is that you?
My SIG is a P226
After 30 years of messing with people's diets, the average citizen is now keenly aware that the medical establishment doesn't know jack shit about what they should eat. People will try anything now.
There is some truth to the Atkins diet, but its now some sick industry. People should just go back to eating the way we did 50 years ago. Just watch a 50's TV show sometime. Get some Depression era photographs. People LOOKED healthy back then. It is very clear.
Remember, the same bureaucrats who created dietary guidelines also revolutionized the educational system and thought housing projects would eliminate poverty. The sad fact is diet fads are one of the last idealistic trends of the 1960's. Like everything else of that era, it was wrong and destructive.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
I currently drink 4 cups a day. Just another excuse to fire up my espresso machine for a double shot latte.
Taking health and medical advice from slashdot postings decreases your risk of sanity.
Ok this is not a troll/flame but by all means mod me down, it's only /.
First, caffeine is highly addictive and weight/diet control when addicted to caffeine is extremely difficult, because it interferes with the epinephrine cycle, which in turn regulates blood sugar and blood pressure.
Second, caffeine is widely shown to substantially interfere with REM sleep, the only part of the sleep cycle which provides meaninful 'rest'. This is the particularly insidious element of the addiction: Less REM sleep -> greater 'reward' from consuming caffeine.
Third, caffeine in *Coffee* is among the most widely used drugs, becasue coffee is the 2nd largest commodity market on the planet (trailing far behind oil but still far ahead of all other 'foods'). So yeah lots of people take coffee regularly and lots are addicted to caffeine.
As pointed out above, it's entirely possible that a fair fraction of the benefits found in the study are attributable to the anti-oxidants in coffee, coffee also contains a bunch of other alkaloids besides the caffeine.
Finaly, the myth that caffeine is required to do geek/technical work is just that, a myth. Wired, jittery programmers don't do well at sustained/quality output (ymmv). When I need to work really extended hours, caffeine is the first thing I eliminate. I can, at a pinch work thru technical problems for 24-hour or longer stints, caffiene will just interfere more once serious fatigue begins to set in, learned this nearly 3 decades ago :-).
All of which I've learned over the years to avoid by trying to plan work out so that emergency sessions aren't needed, I'm to damned old to put in that kind of burnout time on a regular basis.
Linux is Linux, if One need clarify their dist: <Dist>/GNU Linux
bsds are of course just BSD
and, when combined with booze, it's a treatment for stroke!
6 cups is a bit much for your body, and if you disagree you are probably just trying to justify your caffeine addiction.
Sierra Tango Foxtrot Uniform
There was a year back in the early 80s I think when Ice Cream was known to cause cancer.
Here's something to think about when contemplating "medical science". Each year, medical scientists supposedly learn things that refute or invalidate "truths" they had previously known. That means their advice was often completely wrong prior to "now".
The problem is, for any given now, medical science is wrong with respect to medical science a year from now. Thus, medical science is always wrong.
.sigs are for post^Hers.
Employing hard-to-do quantitative trait loci (QTL) methods, he and his colleagues have identified several polymorphisms in the tumor-suppressor gene Atm as possible suspects in the movement of mouse mammary tumors to the lungs.
r 20 02/ConspiracyTheory17.htm
... ... or Chemotherapy?
But caffeine, an Atm inhibitor, may prevent that movement, the researchers have found. "The interaction of what might be subtle variants of genes with common environmental exposures may have critical effects on cancer survival as well as incidence,"
http://www.vaccinationnews.com/DailyNews/Octobe
So. Next time the Starbucks dude will ask
Tall, Grande
...touche?
Therefore if you can drink 6 cups of coffee a day, you probably won't get diabetes.
Anyway, that's my theory and it is as consistent with the evidence as any other, as far as I can see.
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"I can't come to the phone right now, its just out of reach.
I'm gathering from the report that they're not sure if it's the coffee or the types of people drinking the coffee that drops the risk. I guess it all comes down to the fact that when your time's up, it's up. Smoke if you got 'em.
Some claim caffeine helps you get laid too (see "Tactics to Influence Arousal" at bottom of page).
Maybe I am mistaken, but don't those same eskimos have the highest rate of osteoporosis, and similarly high rates of kidney failure?
the wrong time to quit drinking coffee!! Wonder if decaff has the same effect?
Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
. . . . .
Imaginary quote of the day: "I am not an addict. I just do it all the time."
The modern American diet is nothing at all like the early agricultural people's of 10,000 years ago. They had carbs, sure, but not white bread and refined sugar filled soft drinks. You are making a very unfair and misleading comparison. Carbs aren't automatically bad. When you eat a slice of whole wheat bread, much of it is fiber. The fiber takes the place of carbs filling you up more and slowing down your digestion. When you eat a slice of white bread, it is pure carbs. It also digests very fast, making you eat more sooner.
"Men who drank 6 cups of coffee a day"
I suppose dying of a heart attack at 30 would certain reduce the risk of contracting diabetes...
If I have more than one cup of coffee in a day I get twitching and cannot go to sleep...I can only imagine these poor zombies...
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Finaly, the myth that caffeine is required to do geek/technical work is just that, a myth. Wired, jittery programmers don't do well at sustained/quality output (ymmv). When I need to work really extended hours, caffeine is the first thing I eliminate. I can, at a pinch work thru technical problems for 24-hour or longer stints, caffiene will just interfere more once serious fatigue begins to set in, learned this nearly 3 decades ago :-).
The need for a caffiene fix is a self fullfilling prophecy. After getting of a LONG caffiene addiction, I can tell you that my brain works better overall without.
In other words, you drank caffiene a few hours ago so your body craves it and you can't think straight without it. You drink the caffiene and things get better so you believe the source of your caffiene alertness is caffiene. In fact, the reason for your INALERTNESS was the caffiene withdrawal.
-------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
I started drinking coffee _after_ being diagnosed as a type II diabetic.
Seriously, caffeine is my only vice. I watch what I eat, exercise regularly, and see all the appropriate medical folks as appropriate. Diabetes is a progressive disease so fighting the long defeat is worthwhile. Then again, I had a good example of why you need to live right with diabetes. My first wife's father was a type one diabetic (needed insulin shots) and at 60 couldn't feel anything below the waist...
"All the darkness in the world can not quench the light of one small candle."
My dad used to drink an obscene amount of coffee (black, no sugar). He would go through numerous pots a day. He still managed to get type two diabetes. His doctors think it was related to high stress, his high blood pressure, and of course, being overwieght.
He has since cut out caffine, trimmed down, relaxed, and his blood sugar is very stable.
There are side effects of caffine, such as anxiety which could easily encourage diabetes.
If this has something to do with caffeine affecting insulin production? The things I learned on Atkin's.
So, does the caffeine content of Jolt cola cancel out the high sugar content then??
DDT boils at 260C (link)
I can't find a link for the boiling point of chloradine (chloradane, suggests google? I'm having trouble tracking this substance down), but its short name and inclusion of chlorine makes me think it's a relatively light molecule -- 400C is fairly hot. I'd be surprised if it didn't also boil off during roasting.
It is also worth mentioning that the coffee bean is covered by the flesh of the berry, which is discarded during processing, presumably getting rid of most externally applied substances.
I'm not saying your concerns are without merit, but there are probably other, bigger things to worry about when it comes to food. Coffee is probably pretty chemical-free compared to a lot of produce and seafood. And then there's estrogen-mimicking plasticizers in our water, radon, cosmic rays...
It's interesting how many common foodstuffs are being found to affect blood sugar, glucose tolerance, and diabetes in general. Cinnamon, which if you ask me, tastes pretty good in coffee. So for those not wanting a six-cup-a-day caffeine habit, a cup of coffee or decaf with 1/4 tsp cinnamon added might be a good way to start the day.
"I'd say 'Have a good time,' but arson is still illegal.
By minimizing caffiene useand doing a healthy lifestyle thing..nothing extreme.... just good meals, exercise etc People eat themselves into type II diabetes. Steve
I hear this on /. all of the time, but I have only heard one story of an athelete actually using caffeine as a performance enhancer. I think geeks say this to justify how much caffeine they consume.
Steve
As a 10+ cup a day coffee drinker I should be quite excited about this story. However my father his entire life has been a heavy coffee drinker, and still developed type II diabetes in his early 50's. He controls his diabetes with healthy eating, cutting out all sugar and most caffine (he still drinks decaff).
I gotta drink 6 cups? I can't even drink 6 cups of water a day! Can't I just smoke crack instead? It should have about the same effect...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
It's nothing of the kind. This is a serious epidemiological study, and them scientists are actually pretty smart, y'know. Problems like these were formally recognised about a century ago, and there are ways to (mostly) avoid them.
True, this is an observational study rather than an intervention study or controlled experiment, but most large epidemiological studies like this do correct for things like age, sex, deprivation, health, etc. to reduce the effect of such biases.
That's not to say there isn't some selection effect that isn't controlled for which is causing the effect and has nothing to do with coffee. But the next step is that some pharmaceutical company will try and isolate the compound which has the preventative qualities and run a double-blind clinical trial to verify it's efficacy. Then we'll really know. This study is just the start. All that said, you've got a much better chance of reducing your risk of type II diabetes by reducing your weight and exercising than by running a 12-cup-a-day lifestyle.
The half-life of caffeine is around four hours. That's a more useful metric than "It takes two weeks for caffeine to completely leave your body."
Sure the named side effects have been observed, in some individuals, at certain dosages.
>stress, burning sensatiion
What does that mean?
"I'm too tense, and I'm on fire!"
Just by combining those two items you demonstrate you aren't actually thinking about this.
You forgot to mention that performance on IQ tests is enhanced in most people by caffeine.
Aside from your misleading use of side effect literature and your poor understanding of caffeine's mechanism, (adrenal stimulation is only part of the picture, and tends to wear off more quickly than other effects.) I think your observation about anger is skewed.
You're pissing me off with your sanctimonious attitude, and I haven't had caffeine in ages.
Assembly is the reverse of disassembly.
I read somewhere that Voltaire drank something like 50 cups of coffee a day, was the coffee weaker in those days?
He became 84 years old so I don't think the coffee affected his health.
A no-carb diet may help you burn off excess fat (if it doesn't destroy your liver, or give you a heart attack in the process), but a balanced diet is more likely to keep you healthy.
BTW: I'm still waiting for those fat-consuming nanobots that will just take all my excess flesh and turn it into a faster CPU for my cranial co-processor.... c'mon Wintel, what's the holdup here?
Woo hoo! I drink 12 cups a day, so my risk should be reduced by 100%!
--
MM
By including this sig, the copyright holders of this work or collection unreservedly place it in the public domain.
This means corn sweeteners of any kind. High GI starch, rice, and so on. The best diet to avoid diabetes is just don't eat any sugar or starch at all. I don't eat any if I can help it. Eat meats and veggies.
People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
RedBull is the perfect drink to get diabetes. I cant think of any drink that has a higher GI index than redbull. What next? Drinks made of pure Dextrose? Oh wait we already have those. The caffiene will just enhance the GI index and cause an even greater insulin spike. Never mix caffeine and sugar.
People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
fruit juice mixed with carbonated water
tastes great
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
I mean really unless you drink one big giant glass. It takes more energy to go refill 6 times than the energy you gain from that light boost of caffiene.
People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
I don't know why food products need so much damn sugar. Can someone please clue me in as to why every damn food on the planet needs to have dextrose or high fructose corn syrup? Consider with our technology every food on the market could have these things removed and no one would notice much of a difference in taste, why shouldnt the FDA simply ban these refined sugars altogether. Suddenly no more obesity problem because most people become obese because of the refined sugars. Suddenly no more diabetes problem because most people have type 2 diabetes caused by excess refined sugar. So why have diet coke and coke, when you can just have one coke, and if we must use sugar why not just by law only use REAL SUGAR.
People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
No carb diets are rare and stupid. It's a common mistake to equate Atkins with some sort of perpetual Atkins induction phase.
Atkins, South Beach, etc. are low-carb diets. The way I read the Atkins book, they prescribe finding a final equilibrium between the body's carbohydrate intake and its activity level & metabolic rate. That, to me, sounds more like a balanced diet than some arbitrary and universal food pyramid that seems more contrived to look symmetrical on a chart than actually being relevant to my lifestyle and genetics.
This AC makes a good point that you can't lump all carbs together. What really causes the problem in today's diets is that most food is processed very heavily. Grain products have the bran and germ (the most nutritious parts) stripped out of them. Fats have been extracted from their raw sources using heat and chemical solvents which fundamentally change the character of the fatty acids (typically breaking down any double bonds between carbon atoms and allowing more hydrogen to get attached leading to saturated fats). Grain products that retain most of the original nutrition such as barley, wild rice, whole wheat bread, etc. should not be lumped together in the class of 'evil' carbs. The heavily processed sugars and starches in our typical diet are bad because they are simply empty calories.
A balanced diet really is the way to go because your body needs so damn many things to work well and counteract the effects of other things you eat. I know some people don't bother eating fruits because they 'can get their vitamins from a pill'. Fruits provide much more than vitamins, however. Pectin, for example, helps your body deal with excess cholesterol. Atkins' dieters love to eat tons of fat and brag about how healthy they are. I know someone who eats fried eggs and bacon every morning for breakfast. Listen, that is not healthy by any stretch of the imagination. First of all, frying eggs hydrogenates them (if you love eggs, try soft-boiling them so that they yolk isn't exposed to the air). Bacon is cured and processed and filled with saturated fats. Good nutritional practices are not as simple as 'eat more fat and less carbs'.
Many of us have seen first hand how people follwing the Atkins and other fad diets lose weight. But the real key to being healthy (as opposed to just fat loss) is to eat a balanced diet filled with fresh, nutrient-dense foods. You can eat a fair meat of meat on such a diet but you had better (a) trim off excess visible fat, and (b) suppliment with essential fatty acids (omega-3 and omega-6 acids found in flax oil, hemp oil, nuts, seeds) to provide your body with the ability to deal with all the cholesterol and saturated fats you'll be taking in. Don't shy away from all carbs but make sure that any carbs you DO decide to take in are from nutrient dense sources. Never eat any type of bread except for 100% whole wheat. Don't use jasmine, white, basmanti or other highly processed rice -- use brown rice, wild rice, or barley. Skip pasta. Don't go crazy on fruits but definitely include some of those every day. And vegetables are essential. That's probably the most nutritious stuff you can find.
Bottom line: good nutrition is quite complicated. Much more so than you will ever hear about in USA Today or CNN. The best thing you can do is eat a balanced diet and reduce your consumption of highly processed foods. I'm not saying you have to run out and starting buying organic produce (lord knows I sure don't) but do realize that our modern society has traded nutrient value of foods for ease of processing and consumption.
GMD
watch this
Type II diabetes is not caused by "refined sugar" it is caused by excess consumption of food in general, irrespective of the source.
That statement is false. I shall explain why. Insulin. Didnt you learn about Insulin in medical school Mr.Doctor? Insulin spikes when you have refined sugar. If you eat 20 steaks your insulin will rise very slowly, and theres less of a chance of insulin overdose.
Diabetes type 2 occurs due to insulin resistance caused by overdose of insulin. Your bodyparts simply fail to respond to it thus you have type 2 diabetes and you must take an insulin shot and change your diet.
What changes do doctors usually prefer? CUT OUT THE REFINED SUGARS. Eat lots of small meals per day with no sugar and your insulin levels will stay stable. Without spikes eventually your blood sugar level stablizes.
All food is broken down into glucose, even fat.
Rice breaks down faster than a steak. Dextrose is like drinking pure liquid glucose so of course it goes straight into the blood stream.
That glucose then exists in your blood stream where it is used, and excess glucose is stored as fat. This is the function of insulin, it is the opposite of adrenalin. Rather that convert stored fat to energy, it does the opposite.
Someone with insulin resistance (which is most of us Americans), in response to high glucose it may not go to fat cells, instead the insulin level rises higher and higher until they feel shaky, or tired when the insulin level suddenly crashes.
The problem is there is a finite amount of insulin that can be produced, and it appears that with excessive food consumption, the body loses its ability to accurately determine how much insulin is necessary at a given time. No one knows how or why this happens.
This happens because of refined sugars. The sugars put the body totally off balance.
What is known is it is impossible to acquire Type II diabetes if you have less than 5% body fat. A person of normal weight has zero chance of acquiring the disorder.
Thats such bullshit. There are atheletes with type 2 diabetes. It depends on a lot of factors. Want to test it out? Ok try this. Every morning for a month drink about 16 ounces of dextrose. I guarentee you that you'll eventually become insulin resistant.
Bodyweight can reduce your risk because if you are a smaller person your body will produce less insulin even when you spike, but if you spike greatly enough for long enough you can still get type 2 diabetes. This is why Asians and African Americans get diabetes while if you measure their bone structure and weight, they arent usually known for being the over weight race of people.
All the discussion of refined sugar is simply a way to mask the simple fact Type II diabetes is a disease caused by vice, and that vice is gluttony.
Also Genetics, and refined sugar. Would you like to prove your theory out?
Propose a study, let your subjects all be under 5% bodyfat, let each subject eat only rice and drink kool aid every morning for a year. Then measure their insulin levels after they do this.
If there is no spike, you are right and I am wrong. If they do spike like most humans do, well they'll eventually get diabetes.
People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
You know, I tried feeding my kids equal amounts of every element on the periodic table, but they keep dying, the ungrateful bastards. They seem to do OK until I get to Beryllium.
Should I do it as equal parts by mass or by volume?
Translation: WTF is a "balanced diet"? You're defining balanced diet both as a particular diet and as the best diet "by default", but there's no particular reason to assume the two aspects are therefore connected; that's a "naming fallacy" (two things that have the same name are therefore the same thing; false logic). The fact is that a "balanced diet" may still be wrong.
Right now, nutrition is not really a science. I looked into it when I considered doing Atkins, since as a skeptic in general I don't have any interest in going against science. Just try to find the well-done as-close-to-double-blind-as-reasonably-possible studies that aren't based on self-reporting; you can almost count them on one hand. (A true study is expensive since it requires you to provide all food to all participants, and even then you can't guarentee that they won't eat something outside of the study, affecting the results.) Doesn't mean you can therefore eat what you want, of course, but it does mean that you can rationally consider alternate diets; the "balanced" diet is not scientific fact but an unscientific conjecture. At this point, we're all working off anecdotes, so you might as well work with the one anecdote that matters to your: How your body behaves.
(Nutrition is moving into science territory with studies that actually have good methodology. And lo, low-carb diets are holding their own or exceeding "balanced" diets... The evidence isn't enough to make a pronouncement because you still only need two hands to count the well-done studies, and there may yet be a "better" diet then anybody has even considered. But it is certainly not scientifically valid at this point to declare that the "balanced" diet is obviously superior; it's not even scientific at this point to declare that it's a net positive, it may yet prove harmful, or impractical.)
this also causes the body to produce Ketones. too much of this is a bad thing - especially for diabetics. the body is basically eating itself to make up for the loss of carbs. the byproduct of this condition is ketones. it produces a condition known as ketoacidosis for type II diabetics. so long term practice of this diet is not recommended for diabetics.
Correcting a few misconceptions here:
- Carbohydrates are not stored in fat cells.
- *Fat* is stored in fat cells, generally as triglycerides.
- Cholesterol is not generally used for energy storage.
- Glycogen is stored in the liver and in muscle tissue, not in fat cells.
- The body is incapable of producing its own glucose.
- I've never heard of the digestive system "discarding" fats and protein. Excess fat gets stored (pretty trivially), and excess protein gets catabolized, with some parts being diverted to energy storage and waste products getting filtered out by the kidneys. Turning protein into fat doesn't really strike me as "discarding".
My best guess as to how Atkins works is that it triggers ketosis, a pathological metabolism characteristic of advanced untreated Type I diabetes. Under conditions of carbohydrate deprivation, the body hydrolizes triglycerides, using the glycerol to fuel the brain (necessary because fatty acids can't cross the blood-brain barrier, but glycerol and carbohydrates can). The fatty acids that are left over are thrown into a metabolic scrap heap, where they are eventually broken down into ketones, e.g. acetone, nail polish remover. If your breath is sweet when you're on the Atkins diet, that's probably the reason. The "glycogenic state" description sounds like an attempt to paint a pretty face on a pathological metabolism. I'm not sure Atkins is any better than tapeworms as an approach to dieting.
All true. But I'd recommend not trying it if you're a Type I diabetic (like myself). Unless you really know what you're doing with regard to insulin control and maintaining blood sugar levels, you'll end up in a bad way.
As far as I understand it - and I'll admit I'm no expert - the Atkins diet involves initially cutting out/down carbs for the first week or two. This should make the body use up stored energy (fats/general body mass) in an attempt to maintain normality. Then you switch onto a higher low carb intake as required. And do this for a few weeks before eating whatever you want again. Though by this time you'll stop missing the cakes and chocolates and sugary drinks. Anyone disagreeing with this may now proceed to flame my good name to the ends of the post and back. ^_^
Personally, I'll stick to my normal diet and a bit of good ol' fashioned exercise. Less effort all round. Now! Who's for a run down to the gym?
If you can't think of something nice to say then don't say anything at all. No, REALLY.
but for people who think they are fat, and don't want to excercise, a little more balance would seem better.
Atkins is a balanced diet. That's what most people who deride it don't understand.
Yes, the "induction" phase, restricts what you can drink and eat, and there you can't eat any carbs or sugars. This is what most people consider the "Atkins" diet, but it's only the beginning phase. Induction is not the diet, but the cleansing period before you really get into Atkins.
After induction, when you get into the long term maintenance phase, you can eat carbs, although the idea is to limit the carbs, especially the "useless" types like sugar in drinks and white bread. I've been doing this for three months, lost 22lbs. I don't eat any bread, but I didn't eat much bread before. The only thing's I've really given up are sugared drinks, donuts, pastries, and pasta. I get all the carbs I need from fruits and veggies, more than enough actually. I take a host of vitamins and supplements, but well I've always taken a slew of them to meet the required trace elements not found in my usual fare.
Unhealthy diet? That's a load of crock. Yeah, sure, you get some guy *claiming* to be on Atkins who eats nothing but bacon and yeah, he's gonna have problems with cholesterol. But those who've actually follow the program in the book, it's more "balanced" than your average American diet.
Oh yeah, I work out 2 hours a day five days a week, burning off 4000-5000 calories a day. And yeah, I'm still on Atkins since it's not a diet but a change of eating habits for life. I eat basically anything I want, but no extra carbs. I've always had an athletic build, but now I'm cut. Defined. Lean... it feels awesome.
Another point people miss... you can eat carbs. Atkins pointed out clearly that you can indulge once in a while, after you reach the maintenance phase. You can eat a cake at a birthday, eat pasta at a family gathering. Just don't do it every day, and get back onto the diet as soon as possible.
-- If god wanted me to have a sig, he'd have given me a sense of humor.
A correlation is the most that can be proven with statistical methods. Once you have a correlation, then you start looking for reasons for it to appear.
I suspect that there are already a raft of hypotheses as to the causal relationship, but each of those will require separate experimental investigation, and can't be shown by a statistical study like this.
Statistical studies tell you what is found near what, and sometimes finer details, like in what chronological sequence. They tell you what, but the say nothing about how. To answer how requires the construction of models, and the verification of them against the observable features of the universe.
Digression:
I have this cute model of thought, where I divide everything into Earth, Air, Fire, and Water. In it the statistical studies are Air, and the models are Earth. Fire is for what you like and dislike about things, and Water is for goals. More generally, Air is for formal systems. Earth is for models of the interactions of observables. Fire is Desire and disgust, and Earth is teleology. I'm rather sure that Fire is implemented with topologically sorted lists, where more desired things sort to one end, and less desired things sort to the other.
Note that here we have a goal (the solution to type II Diabetes), a formal system (statistical mapping of a selection of cases), I'm assuming that desire played a part in the choice of what would be investigated, but that may have been driven by a model of what possible agents could affect things. As usual, I don't have enough information to completely categorize things, but what I have seems to fit nicely into the system...now I just need to mechanize this process, and....
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Does anyone knows how much cafeine there is in 1 cup of coffee? I drink as much as 3 cup of coffee per day. Is it too much?
If it were true why do bodybuilders get diabetes? There are bodybuilders with it. IT could be due to drug use but really. Also being at 5% of bodyfat is unhealthy for anyone, even a guy. Its not normal to be at 5% bodyfat. Finally just because you are at 5% bodyfat does not suddenly make you immune to refined sugars. Low but non zero makes sense. Depends on genetics. If everyone in your family has developed type 2 diabetes, you could be at normal weight and its not going to matter, its a genetic trait as well as a lifestyle trait.
People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
Carbs, Carbs. Carbs.
All I hear are "carbs". Not "Carbohydrates". Not "Saccharides". Not "sugars". Not "good food". Not "cusine". But "Carbs". Such an ugly little term.
Carbs. That's not even accurate. Fats contain carbon. So do amino acids. And so do lipids. The word is Carbohydrate. Can you say Carbohydrate? I knew you could.
I suppose that when this all blows over, and some idiot proposes regulating ones intake of protein, subliterates will speak of "Amines".
The study was actually performed at the Juan Valdez Memorial School of Public Health.
-- 'As it all washes away you know -- as it all is one, no one is alone.' -Cosmic Disorder
I resent this story. I am not fighting diabetes!
Oh wait...
Does this mean that I have a fight scheduled against this "diabetes" person? Could someone please explain this?
"73% of quotes on the Internet are made up" -Ben Franklin
So, hunter/gatherer types never foraged for fruit? While meat would be a big part of a nomadic tribe's diet, I'm pretty sure they'd also eat any fruit or vegetables that were in the area and didn't kill anyone. Starch might have been harder to come by, but there are lots of kinds of fruit and berries around -- all of which have tons of sugar (just not processed sugar).
Fruits do not exist year round, they're only available for a short period. Humans cannot live on fruits and berries alone; without meat the body has no proteins to sustain the muscles which will soon begin to atrophy. Survivalists have shown that you can suvive for a short time, but not for any prolonged period.
Remember too we're talking about "natural" fruits, not the cross/selective breeded fruits you see on the stands today. Remember that natural strawberries are the size of pencil erasers. Apples were half the size and certainly not as plentiful as we see in orchards. You also had to compete with bears, who were more numerous and and bigger back then.
Atkins is a balanced diet. Induction, the first phase of Atkins, is not balanced, but is the ONLY phase that is NO-CARB. The last phase is controlled, moderated carb diet. Atkins stressed you have a balanced diet; those yahoos who eat only bacon and claim to be on Atkins are as misguided as those who say Atkins is unbalanced.
-- If god wanted me to have a sig, he'd have given me a sense of humor.
All these carbs... all these carbs... we're gonna die.
Look at even relatively recent history, people. YOu don't have to go back to supposed cave men. Take a look at the stats just for the last few hundred hears in the USA alone... or specific parts of it. Actually european countries can be more interesting, smaller and more distinct patterns in some cases. What has been happening? More bakeries have sprung up like mushrooms spreading death and desease and environmental destruction? Not quite.
Maybe slabs of meat are the closest thing may of ye geeks get to "real food". "whole food". That is to say, as pumped full of hormones and various feed supliments designed to maximize profits from the muscle tissue farms if they can at all be justified as seemingly reasonable "safe" (for humans, at least; the odd mad cow not withstanding)... compare it to the rest of your very likely very "processed" diet.
Most process carb heavy products are also relatively fat/sugar-laden.
Now if you want to do the historical and ethnic studies start looking cat high meat consumption cultures other long-term historical health problems. Heart/circulation diseases and conditions like, osteoperosis, and the big one... cancer. Lots of fun stuff.
Just for fun, compare with more vegetarian based cultures... just for fun, compare. Whee. If anyone actually cares about anything besides their sagging fat asses... probably not. No, didn't think so. Okay, fair enough.
Ooops, just slipped into trolldom. Bleah.
Do not mix caffeine and sugar. Drink caffeine without sugar and its diffrent. When did this study mention sugar was in the coffee?
People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
Anyways, from what research I've dug through, caffein (and coffee in particular) is a more-or-less direct cause of hypoglycemia. Well it boosts sugar uptake and sugar processing in the body. That tremendous up (followed by big crash). Of course, having more coffee makes the "up" last longer and the "down" result in a good night's sleep... whatever.
Anyways, to me it implies that coffee and whatever cause the opposite of diabetes... and in combination with an unhealthy diet (like doughnuts... *yum*) can cause diabetes anyways.
Are you aware that what we know as human civilization rose to further the production of refined carbohydrates? Would cities ever have been formed if agriculture had not been invented? Where would the western world be without bread?
The refined carbohydrates you believe are the cause of Type II diabetes have been consumed now for over 5000 years. This is a disorder that did not even exist 100 years ago, and barely existed 40 years ago. What has changed? Until you explain THAT, everything you think you know is completely irrelevent.
I don't need to do a study because it is very clear to me that the problem is fundamentally more complicated than "refined sugars". If what you say is true, human civilization would be vastly different from what it has been. Now, I do believe that the lack of fat in the diet is related to this. It is not the type of sugar, but the abscence of fat which destablizes blood sugar levels. There is a reason why its always been bread and butter and not just bread.
Honestly, I have at least 50 studies which can back what I am saying, but I am not going to bother. This is fucking slashdot, its not like anyone bothers to check citations. But go on ignoring human history... I don't give a fuck. The example you give is total bullshit. People eat rice every morning all over the world. People used to eat bread every morning as well. If you want to argue that behavior is the cause, go for it. Ultimately YOU WILL BE WRONG. Remember this post in a few years when people finally give up arguing such ridiculous theories that are completely contradictory to tradition and history.
PS: I meant to say 15% body fat... I still stand by that number. the VERY FEW people who have diabetes in that range have some other disease of the pancreas. Either that, or they have Type I diabetes and people are mistaken.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
I wonder how sweet fruits were before farmers started selecting for sweetness. Look at the wild fruits and compare them with their domesticated equivalents.
Whatever it is you get a lot of sugar with those huge US-sized drinks. The drinks and servings have got bigger over the years, not surprised that the US people have grown as well.
The Inuits had low carb diets and before the PCBs and other fat soluble pollution, they did ok.
To me the major advantage of the Atkins and similar low carb diets is you don't get the sugar spikes and crashes, which cause many people to feel hungry and tempted to snack/eat/drink. Most people actually feel satisfied after eating.
Higher carb low calorie diets can definitely burn off excess fat as well, but seems many who try those feel like they are starving and can't stick to them.
Yah. 20 years of food pyramid sure didn't help the US people.
I believe it was established some time ago that caffeine stimulates insulin production. Since diabetes, in all it's forms, is defined as an insulin deficiency, this would seem to be a no-brainer.
Six cups of coffee per day? They probably lose weight from vibrating uncontrollably.
But I'd recommend not trying it if you're a Type I diabetic (like myself).
Agreed, though a diabetic never gets back to "eating whatever you want again". That would lead to the loss of blood glucose (BG) control, BG swings, cravings, followed by more insulin resistance and islet cell damage.
But most type 1 diabetics require some form of insulin and drugs to manage their BG. As a type 2, I'm drug & insulin free as a result of Atkins. The diseases are similar in symptoms, but the causes of T1 and T2 are quite different.
I'll take type 2 over type 1 anyday. I hope you have good BG control, and a responsive proactive management team backing you up. Take care of your heart and feet, and whatever you do, don't smoke!
So I'd like to add a few points to the parent:
fat is your primary, most efficient fuel - even a starving person has enough fat to fuel an ultramarathon
fat is burned directly, not by being transmuted into glucose
however, fat can only be burned effectively by burning a little glucose along with it
the energy content of your stored glucose is relatively trivial - nowhere near enough to run a marathon
if you run low on glucose, you will use protein as a glucose substitute
this is what happens to marathoners who "hit the wall"
the starving person mentioned above will die of infection once he runs out of skeletal muscle and burns his immune system for fuel
consequently, although fat is the primary fuel, glucose is limiting fuel for endurance athletes - they eat pasta for primer, not for fuel
such athletes respond to training by storing more glucose and burning less glucose per unit fat - it is the sedentary person who burns glucose for fuel
although the fitness levels of international marathoners and bicycle stage racers are denied to us ordinary mortals, the marginal effects of training decline rapidly - we can get much of the benefit with a tiny fraction of the work
a state in which a balanced diet provides a surfeit of glucose is pathological
"The good reader is a rarer swan than the good writer."
I don't have time to counter you point by point, but here are some corrections to your corrections...as well as some corrections to my original statements.
First, I confused glycogen with glycogon. Glycogon is the hormone that generally "opposes" insulin.
- Carbohydrates are not stored in fat cells.
Not directly - depending on the availablity of glucose, the body will convert acetyl byproducts of glucolysis into fat, or further metabolize it. More below:
- *Fat* is stored in fat cells, generally as triglycerides.
- Glycogen is stored in the liver and in muscle tissue, not in fat cells.
I was probably unclear, but I didn't mean to make that claim. Glycogen in the liver is the primary storage of excess glucose. When glucose is not abundant, the body will further metabolize the byproduct acetyls from glucose metabolization via the citric acid cycle. When glucose is abundant, the body will instead process excess acetyls into fats and cholesterol via lipogenesis. Fat and cholesterol production are based upon glucose availability; they store the leftovers energy from glucose metabolization, whereas in low glucose states those leftovers would be more completely metabolized.
- The body is incapable of producing its own glucose.
Ever hear of glyconeogenesis? It is the process by which the liver synthesizes glucose from fatty acids.
My best guess as to how Atkins works is that it triggers ketosis, a pathological metabolism characteristic of advanced untreated Type I diabetes. Under conditions of carbohydrate deprivation, the body hydrolizes triglycerides, using the glycerol to fuel the brain (necessary because fatty acids can't cross the blood-brain barrier, but glycerol and carbohydrates can). The fatty acids that are left over are thrown into a metabolic scrap heap, where they are eventually broken down into ketones, e.g. acetone, nail polish remover. If your breath is sweet when you're on the Atkins diet, that's probably the reason. The "glycogenic state" description sounds like an attempt to paint a pretty face on a pathological metabolism. I'm not sure Atkins is any better than tapeworms as an approach to dieting.
Ketosis is indeed a state that many low-carb diets try to maintain. Keep in mind that there is no evidence that ketosis itself is, in and of itself, a "pathological metabolism". If a person is ingesting enough carb to serve the bodies energy requirements, ketosis is indeed a symptom of something amiss. However, if the person is attempting to burn fat, ketosis is the optimal state.
Being overweight can cause type-2 but that is different from eating sugar.
The refined carbohydrates you believe are the cause of Type II diabetes have been consumed now for over 5000 years. This is a disorder that did not even exist 100 years ago, and barely existed 40 years ago. What has changed? Until you explain THAT, everything you think you know is completely irrelevent.
Actually... We've been aware of diabetes at least since the time of the Roman Empire. "Diabetes mellitus" is actually latin for "sweet urine", which was the diagnostic test (yuk!) for the disease back then. In the past, type 1 diabetics didn't survive to adulthood. Type 2 complications take decades to develop, and may be mistaken for other things. Either way, since the average life expectancy was less than 40 5000 years ago, your point is hardly relevant. Most people didn't live long enough for the disease to develop.
I have to live with the disease. Funny... I can eat more rice than I can bread. It doesn't get digested as fast.
I'd love to see your 50 claimed references. You've done a lot of spouting off bullshit in this topic. You have your preconceived position, and you aren't going to let go of it. You're not helping anyone, and we really don't care if you want to feel smarter than everyone else.
Coffe, alcohol, butter, sex... can smoking be far behind?
Wow, I drink at least as many cups of Coca-Cola and/or Mountain Dew, I should be in great shape! ...
Oh, right, all the high fructose corn syrup. Damn it. I'd switch to diet, but it tastes so horrible...
The fact remains, even type 2 diabetics have permanent damage to their pancreas (which will progressively decline further), blood vessels, nerves and kidneys. This damage is slowed, but not stopped by even perfect blood sugar control after diabetes has developed. People still get diabetes specific complications even if they get their blood sugar totally normal.
Once your body breaks in this manner, it stays broken, and keeps breaking down.
Once you reach the point of being a full blown diabetic, it is TOO LATE to stop or reverse the damage, all that can be done is for it to be slowed down.
Diabetes slowly kills you, slowly takes away parts of your life (and in many cases, physical parts of your body), your health and your abilities. It is death, but over a long period of time.
Type 2 is due to a failure of the beta cells in the pancreas. Insulin resistance (which requires the production of more insulin to keep blood sugar down) can precipitate this failure by causing the beta cells to become overworked in trying to maintain the excessively high insulin level (hyperinsulinema) needed to keep the blood sugar down (this seems to be the current theory). However, for full blown diabetes to occur, the beta cell function must decline significantly to the point it cannot compensate for the insulin resistance, and thus produces an insufficient amount of insulin for the body's needs. Once it gets to that point, it appears that the damage is permanent and relentlessly progressive. Much in the same way an overworked heart goes into heart failure - fix the cause but the disease remains, along with all the secondary damage done to other parts of the body.
Also, high blood sugar itself damages the beta cells, setting up yet another vicious cycle.
For type 2 diabetics to be healthy, they'd have to reverse all the damage already done.
Stopping it before the damage is permanent is the alternative. Impaired fasting glucose (defined as over 110 mg/dl but under 126 mg/dl) or impaired glucose tolerance (at least 140 mg/dl but under 200 mg/dl at the 2 hour point in an oral glucose tolerance test) are very clear warning signs the system is about to break. Just like having the temperature gauge in your car in the red zone. You'd deal with that before your engine blows, you should deal with prediabetes before your pancreas blows.
Heck insulin resistance (aka Syndrome X, aka metabolic syndrome, aka dysmetabolic syndrome) itself can be measured, and it can also be strongly suspected due to other factors (low HDL, high tryglycerides, high BP, etc, etc).
And I have heard it said, even though the fasting blood glucose normal range goes to 110 mg/dl, anything over 90 is a sign of likely trouble down the road. Healthy is 70-90.
EXERCISE (probably the MOST important factor), eat a reasonable diet, and go to a good doctor (many are quacks) regularly. And pray. Oh, and stay away from corticosteriods, beta blockers, diuretics and other diabetogenic drugs if at all possible.
Disclaimer: I am not a doctor, and this is not to be taken as official medical advice.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
Please. It's a specious argument.
People eat rice every morning all over the world. People used to eat bread every morning as well. If you want to argue that behavior is the cause, go for it. Ultimately YOU WILL BE WRONG. Remember this post in a few years when people finally give up arguing such ridiculous theories that are completely contradictory to tradition and history. Its also a fact that Asians, Hispanics, Native Americans and African Americans generally are more vulnerable to diabetes. Maybe its because they eat more rice, drink more kool aid, and have more starch than your typical white person. They also generally weight less than your typical white person. So the white theory is thrown completely out the window. There are a range of genetic diseases which can cause type two diabetes. This has as much to do with genes as it does with eating habits. Explain why Asians get diabetes more yet weight less and have lower bodyfat. Do a study and explain it.
People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
Caffeine also makes your penis/boobs bigger.
I've read (although from sources of marginal credibility) that developing agricultural societies produced smaller and less healthy offspring than their hunter-gatherer forebears, due to the transistion to a grain-based diet.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
He'll outlive Cartman for sure, probably Kyle since he's a guilt-ridden jewish boy, but I think Stan is less strung out.
Kenny? He's already dead, you bastard!
I agree with my parent; I find caffeine seems to do an alright job of blood sugar stabilization. However, caffeine's effects PALE in comparison to ... (drum roll please)... exercise!
I had pretty much beat a major caffeine habit after surgery a couple years ago, and then blew it this summer on a contract assignment. I've always said, "never trust a company that gives you free coffee." This place has two free machines, one a Nescafe machine, much like a soda machine, and a Flavia flavored coffee machine. The Flavia machine was right outside my office.
:(
I'd grab a cup at the hotel with breakfast, and make another one for the drive to the office. Then, grab a Flavia upon arrival (around 9am). One or two more before lunch. Hit a diner around 1 or 2, have an omelette and bacon with a couple cups of joe, grab another Flavia around 3, perhaps another between 4 and 5. Have dinner around 7:30-8:00, and have some chocolate ice cream and a cup of coffee for dessert. So lets see.. about 10 cups a day. It got to a point where I would drink a cup for every 90 mins that I needed to stay awake. Ready to go to bed? Just don't drink any coffee. Within 5-20 mins: "Sleep, the sweet sister of death. Take me, for I have missed you." (that's my "good night speech")
I was finally able to start working at home in November -- no more travel, no more hotels(!!), and back to a caffeine-free environment (thank God). I didn't realize just how bad it got with all the regular coffee. I've been having trouble organizing my mind for about a month, and I'm finally starting to get cleared up. It was so bad, I was starting to think I went schizophrenic or something. It was like that adult ADD tv commercial, comparing it to your mind changing channels every second or two. Imagine living like that for a month! No thanks..
Now I just have to work on the 4 sugars per cup of coffee
Intelligent Life on Earth
Not only is it a powerful tool, but the new popularity of low-carb diets will improve the quality of life for diabetics, since a lot of new food variety will be available for them.
Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
anorexia helps people lose weight too. Just because something helps you lose weight doesn't mean it's good for you.
I have to live with the disease. Funny... I can eat more rice than I can bread. It doesn't get digested as fast.
What is your age, weight, and height?
I don't read or respond to AC posts
ACHTUNG!!!
I don't know how this turned into a racial discussion, but your facts are ridiculous. Negroes on average weigh more than Whites. That is a fact. This is apparent to anyone who cares to walk around a major US city in which they reside. Best bet, check out Manhattan. There, the dichotomy is most severe.
I am not familiar with other racial studies, but from what I see on the streets orientals are rarely overweight.
Perhaps there is a genetic disorder that causes type II diabetes, but the frequency of this disease has increased far too rapidly in the last 10 years alone to be explained by that alone. I have read studies regarding populations of orientals, and there is a much higher incidence of Type II diabetes in Hong Kong than the rest of China. That supports a dietary difference, and not a genetic one. This same study I read just recently highly contradicts your statements regarding orientals. Diabetes is rare amongst them . Of course, you could be using term "asian" to apply to all people on that continent of which the minority are orientals. If that is the case, you could be right. I don't know. I am not familiar with statistics regarding Arabia for instance.
But even though I don't know it off the top of my head, I am smart enough to check the World Health Organization's Website. As you can see, there are 20,756,772 people in China with the disorder. That is out of a population of over 1 billion. Now look at the United States with over 17,701,942 cases, out of a population of 280 million.
Think about that chief. Clearly, you have not gotten your facts from any reputable source. I will accept your challenge, only because I am an ardent National Socialist. But first, you will have to revise your criteria. I can't explain why Asians get diabetes with greater frequency BECAUSE IT ISN'T TRUE.
The genetic argument is also JUST A THEORY. No specific gene has been identified that can be proven in a large scale test.
Seig Heil.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
That may very well be the case. One thing I didn't want to get into is the issue of caloric density. It is clear our ancestors consumed sugar in the form of fruit, not starches found in plants. The caloric density in an apple is far less than a potato for instance.
But still, such a theory is difficult to prove. It also doesn't help in conveying why sugar is not de fact the cause of type II diabetes.
I personally believe the lack of fat in our diets is the cause more than anything, the bread without the butter. Perhaps it isnt the peak of the spike in blood sugar but the corresponding "valley" which occurs when fat is not consumed. When you consume fat with a meal, the delay absorbtion of the calories due to the time it takes bile to break down the fat results in a blood sugar level that doesn't drop as quickly.
In order to successfully argue that theory however, you need to believe that humans evolved to be preadtors, because fat is only found in abundance in nature in other animals. This is very difficult for many to accept.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
Why don't you try and expend some brain energy there and explain to me what the fuck you are talking about.
Without knowing for sure, all I can say is that it is a proven fact that caloric restriction results in longer life. Routinely starving yourself is the only known path to longer life. Sorry if you can't accept that, but anorexia is hardly the problem fat people wish it was.
Never the less, I don't understand why you brought that up.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
To get some Nescafe. My uncle died of diabetes. If coffee will save my life, I'll become a coffee-addict. It seems nice to me, I use to drink 4-5 cups. Strong black coffe, here I go!! BTW, does it matter if I put some sugar on it??
Hmm. Your post is a little confusing. I'm by no means an expert, but I did see a few things that might need to be clarified.
1. The digestive system doesn't 'discard' excess fat - it stores it in your adipose tissue. (fat cells) This is why eating more fat than your body can use (which is usually a very small amount, except under ketosis) results in weight gain. To put it simply, eating too much fat makes you fat except under certain conditions.
-What you said about the conversion rate of carbohydrates to glucose being very fast is correct, although the speed of the conversion depends on the nature of the carbohydrates, as others have pointed out. Some people are starting to believe that our problem is we eat so many refined foods, (e.g. white flour, white rice, and white sugar) which are catabolized by the body much faster than the more "traditional" diet of whole-grains and raw vegetables.
-Insulin stimulates the liver and skeletal muscles to lower blood glucose levels by forming _glycogen_, not cholesterol, as you said. The body then uses this glucose stored as glycogen as an energy buffer, to maintain blood glucose levels when digestion stops. This is called glycogenesis, and occurs in response to the release of glucagon hormone.
-When the body runs out of glycogen it starts using another method of making glucose, the gluconeogenic pathway. This normally occurs every night while you sleep, and also during the day if you're fasting, starving, or on an very low-carbohydrate diet. This pathway operates by breaking down protein (your muscles) to glucose, to help keep your brain (the primary user of energy in your body) running.
-Here's the kicker, though: The brain, under normal circumstances, uses _only_ glucose as its energy source, and glucose _cannot_ be synthesized from fatty acids. The only reason the Atkins diet works at all is because after a long enough time without enough carbohydrates, your body enters starvation mode and your liver directs the synthesis of ketone bodies (a safe, transportable form of acetyl-CoA) from fatty acids to supply the brain with energy. This allows the body to slow (but not stop) the breakdown of muscle tissue and survive as long as the supply of fat lasts.
-Again, I'm not an expert, and I welcome correction, but I believe that the traditional wisdom about obesity (balanced diet, cut back on fat, exercise) is more correct than the Atkins idea.
The eating habbits of the 50s are why heart disease is the #1 killer now.
Just because people look healthy doesn't mean they are. When your arteries are clogged and you have a tumor growing in your colon, reaching your ideal weight is a pretty empty accomplishment.
What is your age, weight, and height?
male 35, 93 kilograms, 180 cm.
You're going to try and calc my BMI. Don't waste your time. I weighed 111 kilos when I was diagnosed. The question is, was I fat because I was diabetic, or did my fat cause me to become diabetic. Cause and effect are not so simple with diabetes. I exhibited signs of being pre-diabetic when I was 21, active and weighed a reasonably skinny 75 kilos.
Blood glucose swings modify appetite. It's a feedback loop. It can be managed, but first you have to know you have a problem. Stability is the key. Trust me, nothing makes you feel crappier than having your BG go from 95 mg/dL to 250 and back to 110 in a 6 hour period. The rise causes rapid heartbeat, thirst, lethargy, vision changes... The fall, ravenous hunger.
Never the less, it is interesting isn't it.
The point is just this, 111 kilos is vastly superior to your presumed normal weight of 75 kilos.
You admit there is a relationship between weight and the onset of diabetes. The problem of causation you mention is very interesting... I hope you give that some more though.
Looks like you have made substantial progress, good luck to you and I hope you can eventually reach 75 kg.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
Thanks for a "+1, Informative" reply. I already addressed some of your points in clarifications and corrections I made here.
An important point is that "low-carb" diets such as Atkins actually require not only a reduced carb intake but a dramatically increased protein intake. This dietary protein serves the same gluconeogenic pathway, so muscle canabilization is avoided. In fact, most people on these diets add significant lean muscle mass during the first few months on an Atkins-like program. (It is somewhat unnerving to go on a diet and gain 10 pounds but also drop two inches from one's waist.
The phrases "starvation mode" is somewhat loaded here. The "Fatty Acid Spiral" does indeed produce Acetyl-CoA from fats, but in a high protein environment, this process is not indicative of starvation. This is simply a normal metabolic process that allows the body to adjust to a different balance of macro-nutrients. To bring up an example I used before, the Inuit have almost zero access to any carbohydrate food source, relying instead on fat and protein in seals, fish, caribou, etc. Their culture has survived several thousands of years like this. Hardly an example of "starvation".
The healthy body requires a substantial amount of protein. It requires a small amount of fat. There is demonstrably no metabolic product of carb, however, that can not be substituted with a product of fat or protein.
this would be great if there weren't so many other studies ruined by the fact that the demographic of people who drink coffee might take better care of themselves.
for example: people who drink huge amounts of expensive coffee probably don't have a high obesity rate, but that is because they typically take good care of their bodies, not because expensive coffee increases your metabolism or anything.
I'm curious --
A bit of what I've read about blood types and how they affect metabolism suggests that O-type folks need more protein and less carbs, the evolutionary assumption being that O-type evolved during the hunter-gatherer phase. A-type folks need more carbs and less protein, so the theory goes, and the assumption here is that A-type blood evolved to adapt to agricultural lifestyles.
So I may be running off on a tangent here, but I'm honestly curious -- what's your blood type, Temkin? For example, my mother-in-law is an O, and she eats waaay to much sweet stuff as evidenced by her hypoglycemia and vicious mood swings. I'm a bit worried about her long-term health.
Just a thought. But seriously, I'd appreciate a reply.
Cheers
--------
If I can own an idea, does that mean I can legally claim some portion of your soul once I tell you that idea? Or even if you just come up with it on your own? Heck, who needs contracts written in blood...
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
No one move a muscle till the dead come home?
Certainly. Obesity and type 2 diabetes go hand in hand. But which causes which? I suspect I simply burned out my pancreas in college by drinking too much soda and eating too much candy trying to stay awake, and/or skipping meals. Some of my earliest memories are getting in trouble for putting too much sugar in my breakfast cereal. I've always had a predisposition towards sugar and sweets. It's possible I'm a member of the first wave of teen onset type 2 diabetics.
The weight gain didn't happen until I took a dot.com job and sat down behind a desk.
As for 75kg... I doubt I can make it that far. I'd be happy to get to 85 kg. I'm a bit barrel chested and have broad shoulders, so I figure I get a pass to the high side of the chart. (I know... excuses... excuses...) It's still too late for me. I'm fully diabetic. No amount of weight loss is going to help me grow a new pancreas. All I can do is make the most of what insulin production I have left. I'm currently expermenting with weight lifting, in the hopes that I can add some more insulin receptors, and further reduce any insulin resistance I have.
He's a little jittery from his morning cups of coffee, causinng hhimm to hitt some kkeys tooo manny ttimes.
Nothing hurks me off more than news reporters claiming a related factor causes anything (or in this case, reduces risk). Learn some statistics. The *only* thing they can claim is that those who drank coffee also experienced fewer cases of diabetes.
This is a correlation. Coffee drinking could cause lowered diabetes risk, the genetic predisposition towards getting diabetes could cause coffee drinking, or both could be casued by a third factor, such as loss of appetite or fewer sugary foods. The 95% confidence interval for the study was 0.26 to 0.82, so not only do they not know the real cause, the real effect could be as little as 20%.
the study's abstract.
"hard work often pays off over time, but laziness always pays off now."
but caffee increases risk of prostatite by same 50%.
I don't know how this turned into a racial discussion, but your facts are ridiculous. Negroes on average weigh more than Whites.
I'm sure that in Africa where they eat one meal a day they weight more than American white males who eat 4000-5000 calories a day. How do you figure? Why are there more black basketball players, more black track stars, more black marathon runners and atheletes?
How many blacks do you know who are fat? Its not just blacks either, how many Asians do you know who are fat? How about hispanic? If you actually believe whites who eat the most calories and who are the least active somehow can weight less, you are out of your mind.
hat is a fact. This is apparent to anyone who cares to walk around a major US city in which they reside. Best bet, check out Manhattan. There, the dichotomy is most severe.
Manhattan? Thats one city. I'm talking accross the world. Diabetes is ripping Asian and African countries apart.
Perhaps there is a genetic disorder that causes type II diabetes, but the frequency of this disease has increased far too rapidly in the last 10 years alone to be explained by that alone. I have read studies regarding populations of orientals, and there is a much higher incidence of Type II diabetes in Hong Kong than the rest of China. That supports a dietary difference, and not a genetic one. This same study I read just recently highly contradicts your statements regarding orientals. Diabetes is rare amongst them
Eating habits yes, because but my point is diabetes has more to do with eating habits than weight. Thank you for supporting my arguement. Its also not rare amoung Asians. Diabetes is rare amoung whites.
The genetic argument is also JUST A THEORY. No specific gene has been identified that can be proven in a large scale test.
Now for the proof to shut you up once and for all.
Diabetes Gene
That gene is a gene which mostly effects hispanics.
When you aquire metobolic syndrome is 100% genetic.
http://www.advanceforal.com/common/editorial/edit
This is the syndrome which throws your metabolism off balance to allow you to enter pre-diabetes stage.
People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
Depends. Both are connected and Diabetes will cause obesity. Not being active can cause diabetes. Most people who are obese arent active, but some people who are obese run marathons and play sports. Football players are all obese. So are most boxers/fighters in the heavy weight division.
People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
I'm sure that in Africa where they eat one meal a day they weight more than American white males who eat 4000-5000 calories a day. How do you figure?
i to rial.aspx?CC=27116
I am not familiar with Diabetes in Africa, but I can tell you that someone who eats 5000 calories a day will have to expend a great deal amount of energy to stay thin. I don't know why you are using those numbers, but an hour of vigorous bike riding only requirs 500-700 calories. Someone who consumes 5000 calories a day would have to work out several hours a day otherwise excess calories will be stored as fat.
Why are there more black basketball players, more black track stars, more black marathon runners and atheletes?
That is primarily an American phenomenon. The state of the American negro is caused directly by selective breeding and is the best evidence we have that eugenics works. I mean, you wrote Mein Kampf didn't you? You talk about this same subject! Does anyone really think slave buyers would buy a weak slave? No, you would buy the strongest one and encourage his breeding.
Eating habits yes, because but my point is diabetes has more to do with eating habits than weight. Thank you for supporting my arguement. Its also not rare amoung Asians. Diabetes is rare amoung whites.
Did you not read my link? Are you that fucking stupid? I just provided you with conclusive evidence YOU ARE WRONG. 75% of the world's oriental population is in China, and they have a diabetes rate 1/6 that of the US. How the fuck can you possibly say they have a higher incidence of diabetes? Are you living in a fantasy world?
Again, you have to clarify. If you mean "asian" in the way the US census means asian, as in far east and south east asian slant eyes, then you are clearly wrong. If you mean asian by the continent upon which people live... I don't know, diabetes does exist with western frequency in Russia and Arabia, but I couldn't be sure and it will take too much time to find out.
Now for the proof to shut you up once and for all.
Diabetes Gene
That gene is a gene which mostly effects hispanics.
When you aquire metobolic syndrome is 100% genetic.
http://www.advanceforal.com/common/editorial/ed
This is the syndrome which throws your metabolism off balance to allow you to enter pre-diabetes stage.
You think a 100 word article is going to provide proof?
Sheesh...
Try and cite a major medical journal I can look up in the National Library of Medicine at least. Then i can at least see some basics behind the study.
And look at the very first sentence taken from the second link you have posted "Specific genetic markers may influence whether a person develops metabolic syndrome"
That is hardly what I call proof.
Our understanding of genetics is so weak right now all they can do is search for genes in population tests they believe occurr at a greater frequency than normal. They then test the frequency of those genes in an affected population. They have no understanding of the process by which those genes can have any effect on any disease, thus it is purely a statistical analysis which for the forseeable future is useless (Until the protein folding problem is solved)
I am not saying there is not a genetic factor per se, but it is a preliminary theory as is our entire theory of genetics. We are talking about a science that is only a few years old, and there are a lot of unknowns.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
Hiya - late addition to this thread, but if you're interested in regulating your blood sugar, cinnamon may be a better bet than caffeine. Have a look here: http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns999 94413