Slashdot Mirror
Could Diabetes Spread Like Mad Cow Disease? (sciencemag.org)
sciencehabit quotes Science magazine:
Prions are insidious proteins that spread like infectious agents and trigger fatal conditions such as mad cow disease. A protein implicated in diabetes, a new study suggests, shares some similarities with these villains. Researchers transmitted diabetes from one mouse to another just by injecting the animals with this protein. The results don't indicate that diabetes is contagious like a cold, but blood transfusions, or even food, may spread the disease.
The work is "very exciting" and "well-documented" for showing that the protein has some prionlike behavior, says prion biologist Witold Surewicz of Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, who wasn't connected to the research. However, he cautions against jumping to the conclusion that diabetes spreads from person to person. The study raises that possibility, he says, but "it remains to be determined."
The work is "very exciting" and "well-documented" for showing that the protein has some prionlike behavior, says prion biologist Witold Surewicz of Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, who wasn't connected to the research. However, he cautions against jumping to the conclusion that diabetes spreads from person to person. The study raises that possibility, he says, but "it remains to be determined."
Food may cause diabetes... WOW, that's SHOCKING!
the anti-paleo plan
No, as usual. (unless diabetes is based on a fucked up protein.
It's called the pancreatitis virus. Much like there is a hepatitis virus that can destroy the liver, there is a pancreatitis virus that can destroy the pancreas and lead to diabetes. The prionlike protein in the article though seems to be new and this is much welcome research.
I've heard similar things with people with metabolic syndrome, e.g., twins one is fat and the other isn't fat, one has metabolic syndrome and the other doesn't. Take a bit of fat from the one with metabolic syndrome and inject it in the skinny one and they start getting more abnormal fat concentration in the place where it was injected. Perhaps it's a similar issue?
One recent study found that 3/4 of the food purchased by American households contain added sugar, so it's not that easy for most people.
That said, I prepare nearly all of my own meals from scratch; having grow up in a restaurant family it's second nature. The last 4 pound bag of sugar I bought was purchased maybe three years ago and it's still not empty. So I don't eat much sugar one way or the other, and I'm certainly waay below the average 100 pound/per capita/per year average for an American.
Yet I still developed Type 2 diabetes, which two of my siblings also have and which killed my mother and grandmother.
IT's not as simple as "people who eat sugar get diabetes." Some people do and do; some people do and don't. Others like me don't touch the stuff and still get it.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
In case others wonder about the same, the article is about TYPE 2 diabetes. Just writing "diabetes" is quite pointless since type 1 and 2 are completely different. (Got type 1 myself for 26 years)
COTY!
If this was remotely true, then everyone would have diabetes by the age of 60 with all the food and exposure.to this protein. My dad is 85 and is still diabetes free!
"That, or maybe eating too much sugar."
Or, apparently, eating too many diabetics.
Wrong in DJT voice. Type I Diabetes is not caused by too much sugar. Educate yourself.
http://www.jdrf.org/t1d-resources/symptoms/children/infants-toddlers/
Cannibalism is an easy way for prion transfer to occur... and cannibalism was a whole lot more common in the paleolithic age. Is it really 'paleo' if you don't eat your neighbor? Or well... the people in the next town over, I guess.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Good job science for writing the next article for Goop and the Food Babe.....they will just remove all hedges of knowledge and any possible explanations for this behavior and turn it into the next clean eating nonsense.
Could Diabetes Spread Like Mad Cow Disease?
It was possible that it could have done but now Slashdot has used the power of Betteridge for good - the answer is now "no" and we never have to worry about this again.
the slowest news month always has tons of could something happen articles - skip anything where the headline ends in a ?
Well, since they're only talking about type 2 diabetes ... (type one is an autoimmune disorder).
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Nearly 90% of the type II diabetes is associated with overweight and sedentary. You know statistics and so on. Still, maybe your family are in the 10%, genetic factor? Maybe. Did you do a genetic test?
Sugar is just one of many sources of carbohydrates. You may want to try cutting them altogether. I won't claim it's the magic cure-all, but it certainly fixed a lot of issues for me. (I eat 15g carbs/day.)
This is a very modern viewpoint. Don't like climate change? Blame the climate scientists. Don't like autism? Blame the pediatricians. Don't like gun violence? Blame the police. Oh, wait.
Now no-ones going to fuck me.
It's fascinating that a misfolded protein can create all this havoc. It's surprising it doesn't happen more often, really.
Although there is an effect of vegetarian diets on diabetes (beyond BMI), I don't think it is strong enough to suggest that Type 2 diabetes is a zoonotic disease: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
You throw cutting carbs out like it is some easy task. Getting down to 15g/day is not trivial and takes a fair amount of dedication and changing almost everything you eat. Most people I've converted to keto have trouble getting to under 50g/day consistently. Use 2tbp of ketchup? Close to the limit. Eat two carrots? Close to the limit. Drink a glass of milk? Over the limit.
Now you don't mention replacing carb calories with fat, so I'm not sure if you're even a keto or low carb high fat (LCHF) follower...but I will agree that LCHF/keto diet has my body & mind feeling and operating better than ever.
Yes, eating other carnivores is how you get prion-based diseases.
Eat vegans instead, letting them do the work of eating vegetables for you. And besides, everyone around them will thank you.
Sugar is almost completely unrelated to causing either type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Type 1 is caused by your body attacking itself (just like 250+ other autoimmune diseases including rheumatoid arthritis, possibly as a result of heavy metal exposure or other material combined with a genetic factors). Type 2 is a mostly a combination of pancreas producing less insulin, and the body becoming more insulin resistant due to age, weight, lack of exercise and genetic factors). Obviously too much sugar can be a factor in weight gain, but otherwise sugar is unrelated to causing diabetes.
As far as managing life with diabetes, avoiding sugar in quantity is a good idea.
As a type 1 diabetic, managing it is on our minds every second of every day to avoid coma or death from hypoglycemia.
The problem is likely worsened by killing off your entire gut bacteria from time to time with antibiotics.
If this is right, then ultimately, most people would be cured by eating a cup or two of suitable Yoghourt.
However, it is likely there are two or three other causes.
* (1) If people have a large part of their stomach removed - because of cancer, injury, or to reduce weight, often their diabetes is cured instantly (ie blood sugar level becomes normal) while any significant weight loss takes months. (2) Fecal transplants have been shown to cure it in a large number of experiments. (3) Other things I forget, but equally strong evidence.
Disclaimer: I am not a doctor, or medical researcher, and don't work for a pharmaceutical company or Yoghurt manufacturer. I just read the news.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
I'll admit it's not easy at first but when I went through it I found it got a lot easier once my body started healing and I could feel that high fat foods were every bit as satisfying as a sugary desert. It does take will power but I also started with 100g of carbs per day. I'd probably start with that for a target and work down from there. I also drank a lot of half and half or cream instead of milk.
That feeling you mention is what motivated me to keep pushing it. Currently I do eat some sugar but for the most part am strictly meat, eggs, butter, and cheese. I've been pretty hard core keto for over two years now so I'm definitely convinced. I had trouble with obesity for over 30 years and now I can just lose when I want to by not eating carbs.
I presume you've got normal weight, do regular exercise and primarily drink water, practically never soda and only rarely alcohol? If not, then you now know the source of your diabetes.
I agree on Type 1. On Type 2 -- it's complicated. Sugar is certainly associated with risk factors like central obesity, and there is now some evidence that there is a link, and more evidence pointing to sugar's effect on the liver. But the point is that even if there *is* a link, it's not as simple as "people who get type 2 diabetes because they eat too much sugar."
I believe what drives that misperception is the need to believe that bad things only happen to bad or irresponsible people.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
It's so common in my family I hardly need to do a genetic test. Autoimmune diseases also run in my family, and there is some evidence that Type 2 for some people at least has an autoimmune component.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I'm fortunate in that unlike many people I've never had a sweet tooth, or a special attachment to pasta or muffins. Cutting down carbs was easy for me, although I don't specifically try to go ketogenic.
I also learned to deal with the feeling of being hungry. People react to a hunger pang like it's a health emergency. In fact the first pangs are just an early signal to go look for food soon. I enjoy the way I feel when I'm on calorie restriction (1800 calories per day usually), I feel sharper, more energetic, although I do occasionally feel hungry. I am not wasting away.
However calorie restriction does require a great deal of attention to quality; blowing 350 calories on a flour tortilla means you have to do without a lot if you are going to make your overall goal for the day for nutrients.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Genetics certainly decides who is most likely to become diabetic within a population, but environment is determining how many will become diabetic within that population. And the change in environment over the past two generations has doubled (or more) the incidence of diabetes in pretty much every major ethnic group in the USA.
Nice paid comment by the sugar industry.
Or like in my case too many jellybellies
It's not sugar. That's a myth. Consumption of food containing added sugar beyond what is naturally occurring or beyond what we evolved to eat or began to eat starting at the dawn of agriculture WILL cause a spike in blood glucose, but that's all.
CHRONICALLY high blood glucose levels are caused by one of two basic things, and I'm speaking to "proximate" cause, not "ultimate," which is what they're talking about here. One of those things is the body not PRODUCING sufficient insulin, and the other is the body's cells being unable to import or use it, (probably the former, though I confess that's just speculation and could be different person to person, or a combination of both).
I think the jury's still out on which of those possibilities plays what role, but at the END of the day, the thing that causes chronically high blood glucose is taking in too many calories in the first place, and the body not being able to produce enough fat. Ironica, isn't it? It's the result of having too much 'raw material' as it were on the factory floor of metabolism, and it causing all manner of difficulties.
This is why there are people who are super-morbidly obese, great tubs of lard of people, embarrassing disgusting globs of fat... who are NOT diabetic nor insulin resistant.
They took in demonstrably WAY more calories over time than they needed (or used,) but stored it away PROPERLY.
Wouldn't it be funny if the cause was a low-fat diet confusing the body as to what constitutes a healthy balance?
LOLWCQI (laughing out loud while crying quietly inside)
And on the other side I'm 57 years old and could never keep my eating or cravings under control, and sugar is my weakness. I was a fat kid who grew up to be a fat adult and for about four years in my thirties I managed to resist chucking food down my gob long enough to reach a healthy weight.
Soon enough I caved and got fat again, and in my mid 40s I gave up and figured I'll die sooner than I should but I'd be free of the criticism in my own head over everything I ate - and I ate freely from then on. I'm still fat and I still dump shit food down my gob at a moment's notice.
It'll kill me sure enough, sooner or later. probably.
I still have a dead normal insulin response though. Go figure.
Since I was diagnosed at 21, actually. I was 6'7" (200cm) and 230 lbs (104kg) at the time. I could have stood to lose 10 pounds at the time, but otherwise I was pretty solid muscle. I didn't eat much sugar even before I was diagnosed.
I have shrunk a tiny bit in the interim. I took pancreatic stimulants (glipizide) until it stopped working due to degeneration of the pancreas. For the last 18 years it has been insulin for me.
I avoid starches, also. They don't make me feel great either.
The warped view of non-diabetics about what diabetes actually is...is not helped by the frequent obese gobblers of sweets that frequently have the disease. But I still resent being lumped in with that crowd.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
You eat 15 g/day ... nobody else does. Fuck off.
i think this research is extremely interesting.
As a type 1 adult onset diabetic I have always been unimpresse with the attention my doctors have shown to what caused it.
This is purely anecdotal but I visited a diabetic friend six months before my diagosis.
I am not surprised to hear that diabetes may be contageous, and it could be a pretty simple thing: no one is looking.
Fuck off you asshole. Actually I can say yes to all of those.things yet was still diagnosed with type one adult onset diabetes.
It may be easy and cool to fat shame those with this disease but there is a fuck load about it that is not understood.
So cut the crap, ok?
i agree that there is a lot more to this than is known. But as a fit healthy athletic adult male who spontaneously developed type one diabetes, and has failed to receive any guidance from the medical community as to why. The doctors don't know shit about diabetes.
... Autoimmune diseases also run in my family, and there is some evidence that Type 2 for some people at least has an autoimmune component.
Interesting connection there, given that carbohydrates, (especially the simple ones), are implicated in inflammation. So maybe sugar causes inflammation that can eventually degrade to an autoimmune disorder, while in other people the autoimmune component is genetic, as in your case.
Maybe in people whose Type 2 diabetes is eliminated when they change their diet, the inflammation response never developed into an autoimmune disorder. So perhaps there are 3 different varieties of Type 2 diabetes - lifestyle-triggered reversible, lifestyle-triggered irreversible, and genetic-therefore-irreversible. Just a thought ...
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
Also that damning line in the method section of scientific research paper after paper into diabetes: "The rats/mice were fed sugar until they developed diabetes."
Granted not everything translates between species perfectly, but there's a pretty concrete link that *enough* sugar can consistently cause diabetes in a metabolically similar species .
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Type 1, the far more severe condition where the insulin producing cells are typically destroyed, has been well established as being primarily an auto-immune problem. Dr. Faustmann's work at Mass. General Hospital has demonstrated a successful cure in lab animals, and is in its second round of human testing: the auto-immune problem is treated by small doses of the BCG vaccine, used primarily for tuberculosis worldwide, in small doses for 30 days with very tight blood sugar control. Decades, in fact 5 decades of research, provide strong evidence that Type 1 is triggered by a changing set of flu viruses. So, yes, it's conceivable that the right infection could trigger Type 1 broadly. What's not feasible is that it could be a full pandemic: Type 1 is nasty, and expensive to treat, but still only strikes about 1 in 400 people worldwide, even with the wide exposure of children to various viruses. And such viruses mutate *very* rapidly in the wild.
There are some other "Type 1" diabetics, such as those who've had a pancreas removed surgically or cystic fibrosis or XXY genes (Klinefelter's syncrome), but they're far more rare. It's confusing to class them as Type 1 diabetics, but ever since the American Diabetic Association got all sniffy about calling it "juvenile onset diabetes", the labels have gotten funky and they get mixed in with the classic juvenile onset cases.
Type 2? That's a whole different story. Sedentary lifestyle aggravates it, active lifestyle often treats it silently and effectively, much as not living near oceans used to treat shellfish allergies or living in Arizona treated hay fever. But Type 2 is tyypically a *resistance* to insulin, not a lack of production. Whether a virus could trigger that is fascinating, but again, viruses mutate fast and immune systems adapt pretty rapidly, especially with quick vaccine development. So a pandemic seems unlikely. And franly, 1 in 20 people worldwide eventually develop it *anyway*, so it's going to be tough to boost that number drastically or beyond the ability to treat. And the basic treatment is the same one for treating most American's major medical problems: get some exercise, eat less, and lose some weight.
The nano particles used in various processed foods like sugar, toothpaste, sweats, cakes, evaporating paints end up destroying the insulin producing cells, as per local research. Cant escape these day to day products.
Keto for diabetes? Idiotic.
https://nutritionfacts.org/video/how-not-to-die-from-diabetes/
Jesus christ dude, you're probably gonna be dead in no time from atherosclerosis.
OK, here's a huge detour - a bit of potted history of mad cow disease...
Human's don't contract "mad cow disease" (bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or BSE, to give the disease its full name). Rather, we contract what medicine knows as vCJD, or variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease.
One of the most disturbing aspects of the history of BSE actually concerns the way that it was introduced to the animal population and how it spread.
Western nations like the UK (where BSE was most prevalent) have followed intensive farming practices since at least the end of the Second World War, a time where national farms simply had to produce as much food as possible given the rationing that was necessary during the conflict. For beef and dairy farmers, "intensive farming" includes the act of turning livestock not just into omnivores, but cannibals. Included in the "meal" fed to cattle we can find quite high levels of ground-up bone meal which is produced from recycled bones harvested from abattoirs. Crucially, that source of bones included the spines of processed beef cattle, which of course includes the spinal column, essentially an extension of brain tissue.
A couple of years before the outbreak of BSE in the UK, the animal feeds lobby persuaded the British government that it would be safe to make a small but significant change in the way that animal feed based on these recycled bones was made. The change reduced the amount of time for which the ground-down material had to be "cooked", on the basis of the fact that doing so would reduce the amount of [gas] energy required to cook it, significantly reducing production costs and thereby "bringing down prices for the consumer".
Everything up to this point in this post can be validated from information sources widely available on the internet. What follows contains more conjecture because the facts are less widely available. The readers is invited to evaluate and form their own opinions.
This small and apparently harmless change to the preparation and recycling of bone meal [including spinal matter] for animal feed meant that not all of the brain or spinal tissue was completely cooked at the end of the process. It was therefore possible for any latent BSE infection in the brain/spine of one cow to be ground up into meal and fed to another cow. It is possible that the bacterial infection was not killed by stomach enzymes after ingestion, but was in fact able to enter the bloodstream of the subject, flow to the brain or spine and thereby infect a new subject.
It is similarly possible that the widespread nature of the feed generation practices allowed the creation of a feedback loop in which ultra-low levels of the BSE infection were returned to herds, thus allowing for a gradual but progressive increase in levels of the infection. Evidence that shows this is scarce.
When forming their own opinion as to the truth or otherwise/probability or otherwise of this account being accurate, the reader is invited to search for or recall news coverage of the UK BSE outbreak from the late 1980s. At that time, it may be remembered that outbreaks were reported that were initially isolated to single farms. This gave the impression that the issue could have been caused by geographic factors. It was far less obvious, but equally likely, that it could have been caused by the feeding practices of individual farmers.
It was theorised [but never really shown conclusively] that BSE in cattle made the leap to vCJD in humans when processed beef - i.e. ground-up beef that included bonemeal, such as that used in beefburgers - entered the human food chain without being properly cooked. If that meat had been prepared in an abattoir that did not have good controls over the break-up of bovine spinal matter, then it was possible that microscopic particles of uncooked brain/spine could enter the human food chain.
OK, end of huge detour...
Unless Diabetes can be spread by one aspect of its infection vector being successi
"Very exciting"? Bad choice of words. No, it's fucking "scary".
Table-ized A.I.
My doctor believes my diabetes was caused by my consistent weight loss over more than a decade, My body was producing glucose (converted from the fat in my body) continuously, basically poisoning my body.
I developed Type 2 Diabetes after taking Lipitor. Thanks, Doc.
It's late, and I don't want to take the time to create an account so ðY-But do search Type 2 Diabetes & Lipitor
Jesus christ dude, you're probably gonna be dead in no time from atherosclerosis.
I'm assuming you're talking about the saturated fat content. It's a myth that saturated fat clogs arteries.
From here:
The epidemiology of saturated fats and atherosclerosis doesn't look good for the old theory that one is caused by the other. Mostly it's been confounded by the fact that intake of preserved meat (which is high in saturated fat) correlates with atherosclerosis. But it's a proxy because intake of fresh meat and dairy and tropical oils, all does NOT correlate with it.
If you're getting health information from the news, then you are grossly misled.
When I was maintaining my hummingbird feeders I was purchasing at least 25 lbs. of sugar per week (1300 lbs. per year). Feeding hummingbirds is fairly common. Made me wonder how much the data on sugar consumption is skewed just by that.
Sucrose is only one kind of sugar. Eating tons of potatoes, rice, pasta, and other simple carbohydrates is no different metabolically than sugar.
Arteries are clogged by triglycerides, which are deposited in your arteries when your body converts blood sugar into fat. The more carbs you eat the more triglycerides in your blood.
They are superficially similar but are actually different. They have different kinetics, absorption rates, and may be processed via different pathways (complex carbohydrates may require breakdown by gut flora into other forms) and in different organs (fructose and other sugars require conversion to other forms in the liver). Eating a spoonful of sucrose is very different than eating a spoonful of rice, potato or pasta.
...l when I'm on calorie restriction (1800 calories per day usually)
You're a lucky git, I have to eat less (or up the exercise levels to burn down to less than that) than that to maintain my current weight.
You're a lucky git
Aside from the diabetes and autoimmune diseases, absolutely.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Correlation is not causation.
I see other people posted something similar. But if you are eating bread, it has a higher glycemic index than table sugar:
http://edonn.com/2013/12/24/wh...
Also, exercise plays an important role in Type II. Also, look into lipid overload. It's a legit thing. Cells get so stuffed full of fat that insulin can't get into your cells. If insulin never gets into the cells, then it never tells the cells to pull glucose out of the blood and into your cells. This causes your blood glucose to rise.
I've lost a lot of weight on a High(er) Fat, Low(er) Carb diet. In general, I think a higher fat diet is better. But lipid overload is how they induce Type II in lab animals. I'm hesitant to recommend HFLC diets to people that don't exercise.
I had metabolic syndrome. I've still got 99 problems, but pre-diabetes is no longer one.
Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, religion destroys spirituality
And it's different whether you eat that pasta with meat sauce or rice with a steak too. The fructose in a banana is the same compound as in HFCS sweetened soda; but it's not the same because it bound up with fiber and protein.
Digestion and energy metabolism is incredibly complicated, and people are looking for/selling shortcuts and simplications which almost never work. Like equating all carbs, regardless of their exact form or the way they're incorporated into food.
There are really only four rules that I've found to be useful:
(1) Avoid manufactured food. Prepare your food yourself as much as possible.
(2) Eat a wide variety of real foods over the course of a week, and rely on that for nutrition rather than supplements.
(3) Exercise every day and do a variety of exercise over a week.
(4) However much fiber you're consuming, try to get a little more.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... ..."
"Why are diabetics often given inadequate -- or just plain wrong -- dietary advice?
Much of the inadequate and dangerous advice stems from a belief that diabetic patients will not be sufficiently motivated to make the necessary lifestyle changes to heal their diabetes. The typical watered-down, nutritional guidelines are designed to merely manage blood glucose by balancing carbohydrate, fat and protein to keep medication needs consistant. These guidelines are not designed to promote long-term health or fix the problem. To achieve excellent health, it is not the ratio of carbohydrate, protein and fat that is important; it is the combination of micronutrient quantity, micronutrient variety, and staying within our caloric requirements to achieve and maintain an ideal weight.
Many physicians are unaware or skeptical that type 2 diabetes can be reversed with superior nutrition. Other physicians agree that weight loss and high-nutrient eating can lead to diabetes reversal, but either don't know how to motivate their patients or simply doubt that their patients would be willing to make or capable of making the necessary changes. Instead, well-meaning physicians prescribe drugs to bring dangerously high glucose levels down; they want to protect their patients against complications, but the medications cause more problems. Insulin and several oral diabetes medications promote weight gain, which makes the patient even more diabetic, increasing risk for heart disease and necessitating even larger doses of medications -- the patient is caught in a never ending cycle of more and more drugs. Patients are told that medications will take care of their blood glucose.
This reliance on medication gives patients a false sense of security and allows them to avoid personal responsibility -- exercising frequently and eating right is not a life-or-death matter when you can "just take a pill." Many patients don't realize that their health will continue to deteriorate over time, even with their somewhat more "controlled" glucose levels. Medications can't do what removing the cause of the diabetes (the standard American diet and a sedentary lifestyle) can do. I say that people with diabetes deserve to know that drugs are a poor option, because my nutritarian diet is infinitely more effective and protective which can grant them the potential to reverse their disease and live healthfully into old age.
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
Yeah, about that, read this.
And then, when you're done, you can watch this.
Then read up on human heritage, specifically our ~60 millions years of herbivourous heritage. Indeed, I have only heard one factor more compelling than saturated fat in relation to heart disease, consumption of animal proteins. Satfat and Animal proteins are often married together though.
Like the Tobacco Industry of the 1950s and 1960s, meat/dairy/egg industry loves funding studies to confuse the issue. Tobacco had near a thousand studies on its side when the surgeon general made his landmark 1964 report (something like 6,000-7,000 studies on the other side).
It probably was milk, which has a similiar protein as on your pancreas and can trigger and auto-immune reaction.
Thank you for sharing! A link to type 2 diabetes has also been suggested in exposure to depleted uranium used in armor piercing rounds. The dust even blows from the Middle East battle fields to England.
http://healthylongevity.blogspot.ca/2014/12/saturated-fat-heart-disease-meta-analysis.html
"The meta-analyses published by Siri-Tarino and colleagues and Chowdhury and colleagues contained erroneous estimates for several positive studies which in-turn biased against showing an adverse effect of saturated fat. Given the fact that these researchers were well informed in this area of research, it is difficult to accept that they were simply unaware of any of the issues described here. In the meta-analysis by Siri-Tarino and colleagues there was clear evidence of potential conflicts of interest. The meta-analysis was funded in part by the National Dairy Council, and the senior researcher, Ronald Krauss had reported receiving grants from the National Dairy Council, the National Cattleman’s Beef Association and the Robert C. and Veronica Atkins Foundation. Similarly, several of the researchers of the meta-analysis by Chowdhury and colleagues have reported receiving grants from the food industry. Suggestive evidence of these researchers intention to downplay the role of saturated fat on fatal heart disease have also been described previously.
Although receiving grants from a particular industry does not necessarily negate the findings of a study, when errors are made that bias the study results in favor of the concerned industry, the intentions of the researchers should be questioned. The lines of evidence described here lends support to the likelihood that these researchers put their own interests before that of the general public, driving the public to follow dangerous dietary patterns at the hands of fad diet advocates who promote these studies."
https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2014nl/mar/krauss2.htm
It's not just sugar, it's all carbohydrates. Some are worse than others, but all of them are bad for you in any large quantities. So eating bread is just as bad for you as eating cake. The key is to keep your carbohydrate consumption fairly low. I don't know all science about thresholds on this, but you don't need to be in ketosis, so I would say between 50 and 200 grams of carbohydrates( including sugar) per day.
Diabetes runs very strong in my family, on both sides, so this is what I'm doing to prevent it. Also to lose weight, which is working very well. I've lost 35lbs since April, and I'm still losing more. I'm personally keeping below 40 grams per day.
Good going man. I'm on low carb too. I'm keeping it below 40 grams per day and it is working out great for me. You do need to eat some vegetables though. We can get the vast majority of vitamins from meat, but you do need some vegetables to get the rest. There's also a lot of breads you can make with almond or coconut flour. My roommate found a great recipe for chocolate chip cookies that have very low carb content. They have enough that I will not eat more than two of them in a day, but it is an awesome treat that you don't have to feel guilty about.
Go peddle your lies somewhere else.
Then why is a low fat high carb diet the only one shown to have reversed heart disease?
http://www.dresselstyn.com/site/study10/
What an informational retort... have your bunless bacon greaseburger and die at 59 with no clue how you got there.
Well, I trust Chris and he also talks about statistically significant vs clinically significant. But maybe Chris is just trying to mislead people to push his agenda. \_()_/
https://chriskresser.com/cocon...