Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New study: 70% of type 2 diabetes cases linked to food choices

scitechdaily.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 178 posts

Re: New study: 70% of type 2 diabetes cases linked to food choices

#161

Post by bsder »

ordx wrote: post #104
bsder wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm also confused as to how "insufficient whole grain intake" has such a high correlation. "Whole wheat flour" hasn't been the norm in the US since the late 1800s and yet we only seem to have a Type-2 Diabetes problem recently. Any study like this needs to have an explanation for the recentness of obesity and diabetes epidemics.

Sedentary lifestyle?

Possibly. But my personal unsubstantiated pet theory is nicotine and alcohol.

Consumption of both of those dropped right as the obesity epidemic picked up.

Nicotine is a known appetite suppressant. Alcoholics are known to have terrifically clean arteries (at the cost of liver disease).

Re: New study: 70% of type 2 diabetes cases linked to food choices

#162

Post by dimal »

candiddevmike wrote: post #15

I've been suffering from hypoglycemia for a good part of my life, and recently the episodes have started to become a bit more frequent (a bad hypoglycemia episode is like an incredibly horrifying panic attack). Trying to figure out WTF is going on with me has been daunting, everyone tells me to eat more sugar or more complex carbs which just seems to repeat the cycle. No one wants to test me, or knows what to test me…

I had nocturnal hypoglycemia. My blood sugar would drop precipitously while I slept and then I’d get a rush of adrenaline, which would bring my glucose up and wake me up. A doctor told me to drink apple juice before bed. Bad idea. Here’s how I fixed it: low-carb diet and exercise. My theory was that the problem wasn’t low blood sugar, but poor blood sugar regulation. Glucose regulation is a negative feedback system, and by eating large amounts of sugar or carbs, all I was doing was giving my system a temporary spike, which would lead to instability and a big drop later. So I cut out all carbs. That stabilized it a lot. Then I started exercising more. That really helped. And then strangely enough, meditating for twenty minutes before bed also seemed to have an impact.

Now, I’m in better shape and can eat some carbs, but only in relatively small amounts. If I eat fruit, I’ll usually go for a walk immediately, so I don’t get as much of a spike.

It’s also worth noting that I have PTSD, which is strongly linked with endocrine dysregulation, so maybe that’s some of the underlying cause.

The result of all this is that my glucose is now very steady and I’m not having the drops while I sleep. Of course, no doctor advised me to do any of this. This is all n=1 “nonsense” that “evidence based” medicine would ignore.

Re: New study: 70% of type 2 diabetes cases linked to food choices

#163

Post by lurking_swe »

jackschultz wrote: post #63
candiddevmike wrote: post #15

I've been suffering from hypoglycemia for a good part of my life, and recently the episodes have started to become a bit more frequent (a bad hypoglycemia episode is like an incredibly horrifying panic attack). Trying to figure out WTF is going on with me has been daunting, everyone tells me to eat more sugar or more complex carbs which just seems to repeat the cycle. No one wants to test me, or knows what to test me…

You don't need a CGM, just get a GM. I had a case where I wanted to see the effect of foods, and the feeling of blood sugar levels that change during the day. I thought of going through one of the brands to get one but the per month price was decently high. The other issue with CGMs is they're for people with high blood sugar, so they're more tuned to high levels, not low levels you'd have from hypoglycemia, so I'm n…

excluding cost (i recognize that’s a big con), is a traditional glucose meter really better? You have to plan/remember to take your readings. SUPER awkward if on the go with friends for example. I’m also not really seeing the big deal if it doesn’t measure the actual blood reading. Unless you’re trying to do a scientific study. A CGM is good at spotting large changes in blood sugar - that’s really all that matters for the average person that’s trying to learn what foods / activities bother them right? For example “i ate X and 15 min later my blood sugar spiked, maybe i should avoid X.”

It’s also harder to see how quickly your body responds to light exercise unless you carry your poking stick with you lol.

Maybe i’m missing the bigger picture?

Re: New study: 70% of type 2 diabetes cases linked to food choices

#164

Post by hatsune »

prirun wrote: post #74

My personal, unsubstantiated opinion is that the food most people eat is now full of substances and chemicals that weren't there 50 years ago. A huge example is high fructose corn syrup. Almost everything is sweetened with that instead of cane sugar. Food manufacturers IMO only care about making food cheap, making us crave it, and making it last a long time on the shelf. They aren't concerned about making sure it is…

As if people 50 years ago had a life expectancy of 120. While healthcare is primary reason for its increase it is not scientifically rational to pray what was there 50 years ago. HFCS contributed to diseases so far less than cane sugar, with a lower volume dose as it is sweeter by far. As with making food cheap, I doubt what diet will be if local farming is the only choice. Suddenly no oranges from Cali, beef from Chicago, nor fishes from sea. How is it possible to have seafood diet if someone lives in Utah then? Fish out of the dead salty swamp? The single catch-all phrase of "that was not a thing 50 years ago, and there are bad things happening last 50 years, gonna blame them all" I'd rather unhelpful.

Re: New study: 70% of type 2 diabetes cases linked to food choices

#165

Post by searealist »

rleigh wrote: post #132
cyounkins wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High fructose corn syrup is a very poor example. It is composed of fructose and glucose, both very familiar molecules to our bodies.

However, glucose can be stored and metabolised throughout the body whilst fructose requires processing in the liver. Our bodies are not designed to have a large instantaneous "hit" of fructose. They can cope with slow release of natural fructose in fruits, but in processed food it's soluble and released very quickly. The kinetics of how it's processed are very different.

Sugar is 50% glucose / 50% fructose. GFCS is 40%/60% at worst, not a huge difference.

Re: New study: 70% of type 2 diabetes cases linked to food choices

#166

Post by CincinnatiMan »

cronix wrote: post #10
riceart wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No - in general shrinkflation is a thing - and it tends that things peaked 20 to 30 years ago. Many junk food items are larger than when they hit the shelves but substantially smaller than their peak sizes.

An example since the pandemic, a "pint" of Hagen Dazs ice cream is no longer a pint (16oz). They are now 14oz. Same with most other brands that come in that size container. Halloween candy also got pretty microscopic. The "bite size" snickers, etc, are like 1/4 the size they used to be.

Haagen Dazs has been 14 oz for several years now, possibly even more than a decade.

Re: New study: 70% of type 2 diabetes cases linked to food choices

#167

Post by yoyohello13 »

pseg134 wrote: post #158
yoyohello13 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are jumping on you, but you’re right. As long as billions of dollars are being pumped into selling people bad food this isn’t going to get better.

Listen to you two fatalists. I suggest you find the closest ocean and return to the earth now if we are so doomed.

I’m not saying individuals can’t make changes. I have. But it’s struggling against the current. How about we remove the struggle.

Re: New study: 70% of type 2 diabetes cases linked to food choices

#168

Post by everforward »

aszantu wrote: post #136
steve_adams_86 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you intolerant to apples? If not, I think you’re in good shape as far as binging goes. I eat two or three apples just about every day. As far as food habits go I think it’s one of the best I’ve had.

Seemingly intolerant to starches and sugar in general, leads to depression. Weirdly enough green stuff seems to give me panic attacks and suicidal ideation. Takes about 4 days to get into effect. Probably something to do with fermentation. Next one will be the 3rd Therapist, this time she's also a general practicioner. There are all kinds of doctors on youtube talking about this, but haven't found one in Germany who…

Not a doctor, but it could be auto-brewery syndrome [1]. In effect, your gut biome contains fermenting bacteria that ferment sugars and starches into alcohol. The alcohol might be causing depression, and switching to a diet that avoids fermentable stuff might cause anxiety due to alcohol withdrawal.

Again, not a doctor, not a diagnosis, but it might help give you a name that your doctor could look into.

1: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK513346/

Re: New study: 70% of type 2 diabetes cases linked to food choices

#169

Post by jackschultz »

lurking_swe wrote: post #163
jackschultz wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need a CGM, just get a GM. I had a case where I wanted to see the effect of foods, and the feeling of blood sugar levels that change during the day. I thought of going through one of the brands to get one but the per month price was decently high. The other issue with CGMs is they're for people with high blood sugar, so they're more tuned to high levels, not low levels you'd have from hypoglycemia, so I'm n…

excluding cost (i recognize that’s a big con), is a traditional glucose meter really better? You have to plan/remember to take your readings. SUPER awkward if on the go with friends for example. I’m also not really seeing the big deal if it doesn’t measure the actual blood reading. Unless you’re trying to do a scientific study. A CGM is good at spotting large changes in blood sugar - that’s really all that matters fo…

I found it was better. I didn't mention this in first comment, but nutritionalist friend got me a couple test CGMs after I'd been using normal GM with blood samples for a few weeks. I'd check them both at the same time, and many times the CGM was quite off, both on the super low and super high. There were points where I'd look at the CGM, see the number, feel that it was probably way off, and then test the blood and see that my feeling was correct.

Your example is definitely the thing I wanted both glucose monitors for. The CGM didn't seem that great at the giant spikes. With the GM, I'd test numbers right before eating, then 10 minutes into eating, 20, 30, etc. Sure it involved poking my finger, but those were much more informative. than the 15 minutes CGM time frames and the fact the those numbers weren't close to as correct as the blood GM.

True about the light exercise unless you have the poking stick with you. What I did was have an internal treadmill in my apartment building. Example would be test 20 minutes after food, see and feel a 140 reading from the GM, go down and walk for 10 minutes, come back up add see and feel the drop to 100. Learning the feels has been invaluable, and the CGM wouldn't have gotten me the same quick time information that I could trust compared with real time from the direct source.

Re: New study: 70% of type 2 diabetes cases linked to food choices

#170

Post by red-iron-pine »

searealist wrote: post #165
rleigh wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However, glucose can be stored and metabolised throughout the body whilst fructose requires processing in the liver. Our bodies are not designed to have a large instantaneous "hit" of fructose. They can cope with slow release of natural fructose in fruits, but in processed food it's soluble and released very quickly. The kinetics of how it's processed are very different.

Sugar is 50% glucose / 50% fructose. GFCS is 40%/60% at worst, not a huge difference.

Humans didn't eat a lot of sugar until fairly recently, too. And even if you did, you'd have to be very, very rich to be eating it 3 meals a day.

Now you can get sugary cereal for breakfast, sandwich bread with HFCS for your lunchtime sammo, and a curry jam packed with palm oil and sugar for dinner. And that doesn't count the cookies or Pepsi you slam in between.

Raw sugar of HFCS -- don't matter none, it's that you're slamming em at each meal, all the time.

Post reply on HN