Look at the carbs.

Cutting back on the bread, rice and pasta are the obvious culprits but we often forget about the humble spud.

Potato may be the thing to go or at least cut back on to move those extra kilos.

By weight, potato is about 17% carbohydrate which is 17 grams per 100 grams. That’s about 4 teaspoons of glucose per 100 grams or about 6 teaspoons for a very average sized potato.

You manage about 4 grams or 1 teaspoon of glucose in the bloodstream at any one time. The rest provokes an insulin response and moves to fat production.

Carbs are boring!

People ask me what I eat. I am the one eating all the topping off the pizza – all the fun stuff – all the meat, vegetable, colour, flavour, spices and that cheese that melts through it. If you want the boring, glucose laden, fat producing carbohydrate base, then go for it.

More on carbohydrate at
http://www.nofructose.com/introduction/carbohydrate/

https://www.facebook.com/393958287365295/photos/a.407869679307489.94446.393958287365295/659163964178058/?type=3

The low fat means more sugar and that means more fat and obesity. The polyunsaturated oils mean more inflammation and in my opinion, more cardiovascular disease, along with a raft of other illness.

The current literature is undermining everything the Heart Foundation has been promoting for the last 30 years. Popular media is bringing it to the community’s attention (Time magazine this week). The Heart Foundation quoted literature is several years out of date.

Imagine the problem now that the Heart Foundation has.

The ‘prevention’ programmes that have been recommended and thrust upon us from the ‘peak authoritative body’ are making us fatter and sicker.

What are the lawyers going to do with that? They will be lining up for this one.

How would you feel if you have had your heart attack and taken the Heart Foundation advice only to find yourself propelled down an even more dangerous path? Shaky ground for the Heart Foundation and stormy waters ahead.

Next in line are all those corporate sponsors forking out hundreds of thousands of dollars to get the Heart Tick onto the food labels. They will have their own law suits to contend with and I suspect will then blame the Heart Foundation for giving them the wrong advice. Hard to imagine that they will keep giving their corporate dollars away when it gets messy.

The sooner the Heart Foundation considers openly that there is new research available the better. This was a well intentioned organisation initially but now needs to take responsible action – they are continuing to create harm every day.

The longer they keep a closed mind the more likely they will be closing their doors permanently.

http://www.nofructose.com/

https://www.facebook.com/393958287365295/photos/a.407869679307489.94446.393958287365295/654440357983752/?type=3

I wonder if we might see the Heart Foundation and the Dieticians Association make the same statement.

Last year National Geographic took on the sugar question and now the Fat myth is exposed in Time.

Next may be the organisations (with their corporate sponsors) that keep the myth going.

As each month goes by we seem to be less ‘alone’ on standing up to these entrenched corporate sponsored views.

Try the full article here – due out on June 23 or join Time online.

http://time.com/2863227/ending-the-war-on-fat/?pcd=hp-magmod

The video is also available at http://on.aol.com/video/the-truth-about-fat-518267566

The March 26,1984 article ‘Hold the Eggs and Butter’ by Claudia Wallis is available at http://content.time.com/…/mag…/article/0,9171,921647,00.html

https://www.facebook.com/393958287365295/photos/a.407869679307489.94446.393958287365295/652566718171116/?type=3

Wise words here from the blog. And not just for Diabetics.

‘Not sure why it’s treated as a joke as sex is an important part of a healthy and balanced lifestyle for most.

Sex is nice and pleasure is good for you, but it gets treated as a joke because people are embarrassed to talk about it, even in long term relationships.

This means that very many people don’t actually have the kind of sex and intimacy that they really want. And when it comes to trying to negotiate with your partner to get the kind of intimacy you want, people get tongue-tied and awkward, especially women, because nice girls don’t ask. Although how anyone can possibly bring pleasure to a partner without knowing what turns them on is beyond me. Hardly surprising that the libido hits rock bottom.

The biggest erogenous zone you have is in the space between your ears, if someone can’t stimulate that part for me it really isn’t going to go anywhere else. There is so much more to intimacy and a healthy sex life than penetrative sex, which is where many discussions seem to start and end, often with bruised egos.

Now, while there can be huge thrill to an illicit quicky, I’d say most of us would like to spend a bit more time. I think you need a running buffet attitude rather than a fast food approach to good sex.

Add to the embarrassment some of the problems you get with diabetes, especially if blood sugar is running high and you are fatigues and fuzzy headed or you have the longer term problems with erectile dysfunction or the risk of hypos if you are on insulin… bit of a minefield :?’

http://www.diabetes.co.uk/diabetes-and-sex.html…

https://www.facebook.com/393958287365295/photos/a.407869679307489.94446.393958287365295/649080718519716/?type=3&permPage=1

This weeks Lancet published a multi country article funded by Bill and Melinda Gates. It describes the rapid increase in BMI across all nations and highlights the problems particularly in developing nations.

“Worldwide, the proportion of adults with a body-mass index (BMI) of 25 kg/m2 or greater increased between 1980 and 2013 from 28·8% to 36·9% in men, and from 29·8% to 38·0% in women.

Prevalence has increased substantially in children and adolescents in developed countries; 23·8% of boys and 22·6% of girls were overweight or obese in 2013.

The prevalence of overweight and obesity has also increased in children and adolescents in developing countries, from 8·1%
to 12·9% in 2013 for boys and from 8·4% to 13·4% in girls.”

The editorial comment included
“Does the whole food environment, not just dietary fat and tobacco, need to be changed to reduce exposure to calories, in circumstances in which economic growth, via consumption, is deemed to be of prime importance?

An appropriate rebalancing of the primal needs of humans with food availability is essential, which would entail curtailing many aspects of production and marketing for food industries.

To prevent unsustainable health consequences, BMI needs to return to what it was 30 years ago.”

http://www.thelancet.com/…/PIIS0140-6736%2814%2960…/abstract