tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13260386.post116481567741817970..comments2024-03-13T06:54:20.063-05:00Comments on Weight of the Evidence: ADA Responds to Men's Health Magazine ArticleUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13260386.post-1167680142748017222007-01-01T13:35:00.000-06:002007-01-01T13:35:00.000-06:00It's sad that one of the pioneers of the low carb/...It's sad that one of the pioneers of the low carb/high fat diets is never mentioned in these posts or in the MH article. Dr. Robert Atkins also reported the same results in his publications over 35 years ago. Critics accused his diet of causing kidney failure, liver failure, diabetes, etc., when of course the exact opposite was true. Unfortunately Atkins main goal was for people to lose weight, and that is all he is know for. But if you read his books, you'll see that he also discussed the side effects of lowered blood sugar, lowered blood pressure, lowered triglycerides, etc.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13260386.post-1165223510140915192006-12-04T03:11:00.000-06:002006-12-04T03:11:00.000-06:00Estimates of type 1 diabetics are sketchy at best ...Estimates of type 1 diabetics are sketchy at best but From what I've read the number of type 1 diabetics is anywhere from 340,000 to three million Americans. quite a range. Now insulin dependent diabetics are estimated by the CDC to be about 6 million but that figure includes both type 1 and type 2. So if the higher number of 3 million is accurate that would amount to 1 percent of Americans with type 1. I think part of the confusion is that some websites have information saying that 5 to 10% of Americans have type 1 diabetes when they mean 5 tp 10% of diabetics are type 1. very different results.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02522319812266109636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13260386.post-1165221729482245072006-12-04T02:42:00.000-06:002006-12-04T02:42:00.000-06:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02522319812266109636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13260386.post-1165015285196042892006-12-01T17:21:00.000-06:002006-12-01T17:21:00.000-06:00Rob is unfortunately very, very wrong on this, in ...Rob is unfortunately very, very wrong on this, in fact, the incidence of type 1 diabetes has been growing and recent studies undertaken jointly by the CDC and JDRF called SEARCH for diabetes in youth revealed that the incidence of type 1 diabetes is actually higher than the 5-10% figure ...<BR/><BR/>Rob said... ADA: "Between 5-10 percent of Americans have type 1 diabetes, which occurs when the body does not produce insulin"<BR/><BR/>This is completely and oviously incorrect. It's more like 1/8th of one percent of Americans that have Type 1 Diabetes. Geez that's sad that the ADA can't even get that right.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13260386.post-1164891520728144702006-11-30T06:58:00.000-06:002006-11-30T06:58:00.000-06:00Thank you for the article - and welcome back. I ho...Thank you for the article - and welcome back. I hope whatever ailed you was temporary and is gone.<BR/><BR/>I'll just comment on one small section. Hidden in the verbiage of the "stock" reply from the ADA was this snippet:<BR/><BR/>"ADA: The article glosses over the difference between type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Between 5-10 percent of Americans have type 1 diabetes, which occurs when the body does not produce insulin. Patients with type 1 must take insulin for the rest of their lives in order to survive. Because it is an autoimmune disorder, type 1 diabetes is not preventable – an important distinction from type 2 diabetes."<BR/><BR/>First, the implication of patient fault in the final sentence is a concern. That use of the language implies that the ADA consensus is that all type 2's could have avoided their fate; possibly true for some, but certainly not for all. That is a worrying implication of attitude within the organisation. Of more concern is the shift in their own mission statement - their dietary guidelines are designed from "studies" for general health and prevention of progression to type 2 diabetes - not for treatment of existing type 2. For that their prime advice is to add medications to the "prevention" diet. Their focus is on the prevention - not the treatment. Both should be of equal importance.<BR/><BR/>Secondly, they are quite correct to specify that the two conditions are different. However, they effectively make almost no distinction between the two in their own dietary and MNT guidelines. A menu that a type 1 may be able to easily balance with insulin can be a disaster for a type 2 trying to control with diet, exercise and minimal medication.<BR/><BR/>Cheers, AlanAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13260386.post-1164887081718795092006-11-30T05:44:00.000-06:002006-11-30T05:44:00.000-06:00The name should be: Assured Diabetes Association. ...The name should be: Assured Diabetes Association. This organization is directly responsible for the diabetes epidemic, and somebody should sue them for medical malpractice and willful neglect. It's an outrage and complete travesty to spend tens of millions of dollars on so-called "research" - while it's nothing than worthless, baseless, scientifically completely unteniable propaganda.Science4u1959https://www.blogger.com/profile/14032931049767819624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13260386.post-1164886492418716012006-11-30T05:34:00.000-06:002006-11-30T05:34:00.000-06:00ADA: "Between 5-10 percent of Americans have type ...ADA: "Between 5-10 percent of Americans have type 1 diabetes, which occurs when the body does not produce insulin"<BR/><BR/>This is completely and oviously incorrect. It's more like 1/8th of one percent of Americans that have Type 1 Diabetes. Geez that's sad that the ADA can't even get that right.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02522319812266109636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13260386.post-1164874947777464962006-11-30T02:22:00.000-06:002006-11-30T02:22:00.000-06:00The ADA in my opinion is responsible for the incre...The ADA in my opinion is responsible for the increase in diabetes.<BR/>Also the ADA keep saying there are no studies showing that low carb diets work long-term etc, yet they keep quoting the kidney disease and heart disease without any studies to back that up!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13260386.post-1164862499018833342006-11-29T22:54:00.000-06:002006-11-29T22:54:00.000-06:00Excellent!!! Too bad the ADA doesn's see it, as so...Excellent!!! <BR/><BR/>Too bad the ADA doesn's see it, as so many think they are THE authority on diabetes!! <BR/><BR/>WSelcome back!Cindy Moorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02612862819330818841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13260386.post-1164839408393132372006-11-29T16:30:00.000-06:002006-11-29T16:30:00.000-06:00At least the ADA is consistent, consistently biase...At least the ADA is consistent, consistently biased!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com