|
The Sugar and Diabetes Story
She called the Lifestyle Center of America desperately
for help. Thirty years of
diabetes had taken a tremendous toll on her health.
The high blood sugars had done their work silently for years, but now
the bitter harvest was undeniably obvious.
Jenny had kidney failure and resulting fluid accumulation.
Of more concern to her, however, was that she was going blind.
Her vision had been getting progressively worse, and the doctors had
given her no hope. With those
discouraging prospects ahead she became excited as she heard about a
lifestyle approach toward reversing the effects of diabetes.
The Lifestyle Center of America, a place in Oklahoma
that provides a three-week therapy live-in program, is not unique in
offering a program to reverse the ravages of diabetes.
I have been giving my patients similar information for years and have
seen some of the same dramatic results that the live-in centers achieve:
people decreasing or getting off insulin and oral medications with a
lifestyle approach to this killer disease.
Sadly, however, there are many people like Jenny who come to me with
advanced diabetes. In many of
those cases we are not able to “turn back the clock” and restore their
vision or their kidney function. Yes,
we may be able to provide some help in those areas, but often the severe
damage that has already been done is beyond the point of complete reversal.
What is tragic is that it often takes irreversible
complications before people really get serious about doing all they can to
control their diabetes. By then
it is too late to accomplish all we could have if they had gotten serious
years earlier. The cases of a
thousand Jennys eloquently proclaim: diabetes needs to be promptly
recognized and treated. Many
newly diagnosed diabetics—as well as those struggling with the disease for
longer periods of time—can control their diabetes without drugs by
following an excellent lifestyle. Do
not wait until a heart attack, or amputation, or blindness serves as a wake
up call. The wake up call should be that first “borderline blood
sugar”—the slightest suggestion of diabetes.
In this chapter we will look at important information
about diagnosing and dealing with diabetes.
Even if you do not have diabetes, you will want to give special
attention to the closing sections of this chapter; there I focus on the
dangers of eating sugar even for those who have no problem with diabetes.
You will learn about the effects of sugar on the immune system, its
role in weight gain, and other fascinating areas.
Also in this chapter I contrast sugar with its two carbohydrate
cousins: complex carbohydrates and fiber.
We will look at some of the exciting benefits of these more healthful
carbohydrates.
What Exactly is Diabetes?
Diabetes mellitus or “sugar diabetes” is a
condition where an abnormal response to insulin and/or inadequate insulin
production causes high blood sugar levels.
This is usually defined by a fasting blood sugar of greater than 125
on two occasions,1 or a positive glucose tolerance test (the individual
drinks a specified amount of glucose, usually 75 grams and their blood
sugars are evaluated over a two hour period).
Over time, these high blood sugar levels and the other metabolic
changes that go along with diabetes are extremely taxing on the body.
Consequently, diabetes dramatically increases one’s risk of death
and disability.
Current statistics are sobering. In America there are now three times as many diabetics as
there were in 1958.2 Estimates
are that some 16 million Americans now have this condition, up from 11
million as recent as 1983. Depending
on their type of diabetes and other characteristics, they run anywhere from
2 to 12 times the risk of death when compared to their non-diabetic peers.3
Diabetes increases the risk of heart disease and other diseases
related to atherosclerosis such as stroke or the loss of an arm or leg from
blood vessel blockage. Diabetes
also dramatically increases one’s chances of infections, kidney failure,
and an eye disease called retinopathy, which can result in blindness. The
number of people in the U.S. that are afflicted by diabetes is shown in Figure
1: Diabetes in America - The Facts. 4
The myriad of afflictions that result from diabetes is listed in Figure
2: Afflictions of Diabetes. 5,6,7,8,9
Although heart disease is the leading cause of death
among diabetics,10 sometimes the debilitating effects of blindness and
kidney disease are more frightening. Within
only seven years of diagnosis, as many as 50 percent of children with
diabetes have developed diabetic retinopathy, a disease of the eyes that can
result in blindness.11 Diabetics
need to get checked by eye doctors regularly.
Diabetic eye disease is preventable, not only through lifestyle, but
also by early treatment. Furthermore,
diabetics run a significant risk of developing kidney disease.
In any given year, some 55,000 Americans are suffering with what is
called “end-stage renal disease” due to their diabetes.12, 13
These individuals have such poor kidney function that they are alive
only by virtue of a transplant or regular dialysis treatments.
End-stage renal disease among diabetics is increasing dramatically in
the United States. Whereas
5,000 new cases were being diagnosed per year in the early 1980s, a decade
later the figure had jumped to 18,000 new cases per year.14
In fact, over 35 percent of all patients with end-stage kidney
disease are diabetic.15 Diabetic
women are also more prone to develop breast and uterine cancer.16
No dollar amount can eclipse the thousands of personal
tragedies due to diabetic complications.
Nevertheless, in a nation where health care costs are skyrocketing,
the financial impact of diabetes is truly relevant. The direct and indirect cost to society for diabetes is
estimated to be between 90 and 130 billion dollars per year in America
alone.17
All Diabetics Are Not the Same
Diabetics are often divided into four categories.
Of these four categories, there are actually two main types of
diabetes: insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM), often referred to as
Type I, and non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM), often
designated Type II.18 Although
some diabetes purists will take pains to use the terms IDDM and NIDDM, in
this chapter I will use the terms Type I and Type II. A third type of diabetes occurs in pregnancy and is called
gestational diabetes mellitus. The
fourth category of diabetes takes in a host of rarer causes of the disorder
such as those due to hormonal abnormalities or other medical conditions.
Type I diabetes is the most severe form of the disease.
It typically occurs in childhood (but can develop at any age) and for
this reason was previously called “juvenile diabetes.”
The most common cause of Type I diabetes is destruction of the
insulin-making cells in the pancreas by the person’s own immune system.
This is referred to as “autoimmune destruction.”
The specific factors that trigger this autoimmune process have proved
elusive. Although some cases
have been linked to viruses or chemical toxins, much is still unknown about
the beginnings of the Type I diabetes process.19
There does seem to be a genetic susceptibility to the disease, plus
an environmental factor that triggers the disease process.
Some of the most interesting recent research links some cases of Type
I diabetes to an abnormal immune reaction to milk protein.
We now know that children who are breast fed for a shorter time or
who are started on cow’s milk earlier have an increased risk for this type
of diabetes.20 In fact, the
drinking of cow’s milk may be the trigger that initiates the disease in
over half of all Type I diabetics.21
Regardless of the cause of their Type I diabetes,
affected individuals lose their ability to make adequate amounts of insulin
and are left with an absolute life-and-death need for insulin shots.
Without those shots, they go into a condition called diabetic
ketoacidosis, which is fatal if not promptly treated.
Because of their absolute need for insulin, individuals with Type I
diabetes are usually diagnosed early in the disease process.
Typically they have symptoms like excessive urination (polyuria),
excessive thirst (polydipsia), excessive hunger, and excessive eating (polyphagia).
They often are also bothered by fatigue and weight loss.
Why does the Type I diabetic develop these symptoms?
The answer is best arrived at through a brief review of some of the
main facts about blood sugar and how it is controlled.
The main fuel for our bodies is a simple sugar called glucose.
There is a potential problem, however, with this fuel source.
It can only get into each cell of the body if insulin is present.
Some have compared insulin to a key that opens “the doors” in
body cells so that the vital fuel, glucose, can get into the cell.
However, if there is an insufficient amount of insulin (as in Type I
diabetes) or if the locks on the doors are “gummed up” so that the
insulin key has difficulty opening them (as can occur with the insulin
resistance of Type II diabetes), then blood sugar levels can rise. When blood sugar levels rise sufficiently, the ability of the
kidney to contain the sugar is overwhelmed, and sugar comes out in the
urine. The sugar takes water
with it, thus leading to the excessive urination so familiar in uncontrolled
diabetes. The loss of water
results in another diabetes symptom: increased thirst.
At the same time, sugar is not moving into the body’s cells
adequately. In a sense, the
body’s cells are starving for energy.
This can cause fatigue, weight loss, and excessive hunger.
Fortunately, only about 5 to 10 percent of diabetics in
America fall under the Type I diabetes category.22 The remainder are Type II diabetics.
These individuals either have a problem called “insulin
resistance” or a less severe underproduction of insulin than those with
the Type I variety. In
actuality, most fully developed Type II diabetics have both of these
problems.23 There appear to be
many different causes of Type II diabetes; most seem to have a genetic
basis. The majority of individuals with this type of diabetes have a
family member that had also been diagnosed with the disease.
For example, many Native Americans have this genetic tendency;
however, it appears they did not have diabetes until they adopted a Western
diet with an overabundance of sugar and fat.
Simply put, it usually takes a combination of two factors to develop
adult onset diabetes. One is genetics, and the other is a poor diet—like that
consumed by the average American.
Many individuals with Type II diabetes generate plenty
of insulin but their body is resistant to it.
This condition of insulin resistance can be addressed by lifestyle
changes. By maintaining an
excellent diet, achieving an ideal weight, and embarking on an exercise
program, many Type II diabetics can control their blood sugars with these
lifestyle changes alone. Some
may need diet changes plus a pill to help control their blood sugar.
Because of the more subtle nature of Type II diabetes
compared to Type I, it often goes undiagnosed.
A person with Type II diabetes may not have any of the classic
diabetes signs like excessive urination, excessive thirst, excessive hunger,
fatigue, or weight loss. At any
point in time, it is estimated that fully 50 percent of Type II diabetics
have not yet been diagnosed.24 Of
course, unrecognized diabetes still does its damage steadily and silently. About 20 percent of newly diagnosed Type II diabetics already
had damage to their eyes (retinopathy).25
Sometimes an unsuspecting person will be told they have diabetes when
a routine blood screening reveals high blood sugar. If the blood sugar is above 125 after an overnight fast, it
indicates diabetes. Individuals
can have diabetes, however, with fasting blood sugars below that level.
If a doctor suspects diabetes in a person with a relatively low
fasting sugar, further testing can be done.
The oral glucose tolerance test checks for diabetes by measuring a
person’s blood sugar response to a sugary beverage.
Pregnant women routinely have such a test to make sure they are not
diabetic. Some doctors recommend that others in the general population
should have a glucose tolerance test. Depending
on the physician, some will recommend the test for those with significant
obesity and/or genetics. Others
advise the glucose tolerance test in anyone with fasting sugars higher than
a certain level. Some will
check all those with fasting sugars over 105; some very conservative doctors
will advise the test to all their patients who have fasting sugars
consistently over 95, since this usually indicates that at least the
individual has the gene for Type II diabetes.
A glycosylated hemoglobin level (discussed later in the chapter) may
be able to substitute for the glucose tolerance test in detecting diabetics
with fasting blood sugars less than 125.26
Although Type II diabetes can be picked up by such
blood tests for elevated sugar, many Americans do not seek out health
professionals for such preventive services.
They wait until they are sick. This
is unfortunate. As a result,
many Type II diabetics only become aware of their disease when they
experience potentially irreversible problems like eye or kidney disease,
nerve problems, or a heart attack.
Regarding gestational diabetes, two to five percent of
all pregnant American women are affected.27
This translates into about 200,000 children being born to mothers
with gestational diabetes each year.28, 29 This is significant, because
those children experience an increased risk of health disorders such as
birth trauma, lower blood sugars at birth (neonatal hypoglycemia), and even
premature death in infancy (perinatal mortality).30
The message is clear: if you are a diabetic who becomes pregnant, or
if you develop gestational diabetes, you should have your blood sugar
monitored closely. Your diet
and lifestyle need to be well regulated.
Furthermore, any woman who develops gestational diabetes has a
genetic tendency for diabetes. She
is at high risk to develop full blown diabetes later in life.31
Practicing healthy habits throughout her life span thus becomes
critical.
Controlling
Diabetes: Can the Ravages of Diabetes be
Prevented?
Recently, a landmark Diabetes Control and Complications
Trial (DCCT) was completed. This
six-year study looked at 1441 Type I juvenile diabetics.
Those diabetics who strove to keep their blood sugars as close to
normal as possible (using insulin and lifestyle changes) had 76 percent less
chance of developing diabetic retinopathy, a serious eye disease.32
They also experienced 54 percent fewer cases of significant kidney
disease and 60 percent fewer cases of nerve problems involving the hands
and/or feet (peripheral neuropathy).33
The participants also significantly lowered their blood cholesterol
levels, suggesting that tight control could decrease heart disease risk by
up to 35 percent.34 These improvements are summarized in Figure
3: Results of Blood Sugar Control in Type 1 Diabetics.
Diabetics in this study who keep their sugars as close
to normal as possible are said to be practicing “intensive therapy” or
“tight control.” This begs
a question: in the research just referred to, exactly how intensive was
“intensive” (or how tight was “tight control”)?
The DCCT had very clear blood sugar goals.
Fasting blood sugars in the morning as well as blood sugars before
each meal were to be between 70 to 120.
After-meal levels were to stay below 180.
Furthermore, a middle-of-the-night sugar at 3 AM was to stay above
65. To find out how well the
participants were adhering to these goals, an additional blood test called
glycosylated hemoglobin was taken regularly.
This test measures the amount of sugar that becomes attached to a
person’s red blood cells. The
amount of attached sugar in turn is directly related to the average amount
of sugar in the blood throughout the life span of the red blood cells.
Since red blood cells typically live for 90 to 100 days, the
glycosylated hemoglobin value gives an approximation as to the average blood
sugar level over a three-month period.
In the DCCT study, levels were about 6.05 percent.
This compares favorably with a value of 7.5 percent, which is
considered the upper limit of normal in a non-diabetic population.35
How does intensive therapy differ from the standard or
conventional way of treating diabetes?
First, intensive therapy always refers to treatment using insulin.
Second, with intensive therapy there are no fixed doses of insulin.
For example, a diabetic on this type of program does not take a fixed
amount of insulin every morning. The
amount of insulin is adjusted according to the level of blood sugar at the
time the insulin is given. This
differs from the old way of giving insulin that is still called a
“conventional fixed dose program.”36
That approach assumed that insulin requirements would be the same
each day. In fact, we now know
that insulin needs can vary tremendously from day to day.
This knowledge of changing insulin needs provides the rationale for
intensive therapy.
Intensive insulin therapy attempts to artificially
simulate how our bodies’ insulin-producing organ, the pancreas, works: the
pancreas constantly secretes insulin into the blood so that there is always
some insulin present. This is
what is called the basal insulin level.
The pancreas also secretes extra insulin in response to the food we
eat.37 To reproduce this effect
of basal insulin some diabetics will use a long-acting insulin shot, while
others will use an insulin pump that works continuously to deliver this
basal insulin level. To
reproduce the food-related insulin surge, whether on shots or on the pump,
additional regular insulin or a short-acting insulin (Humalog) is given.
If the shot method is used, at least three shots per day are given on
the intensive insulin program. To
evaluate the body’s needs for insulin, frequent blood sugar monitoring is
necessary. Blood is obtained
for this purpose by pricking the finger with a small needle-like instrument
called a lancet. Then this
blood is analyzed by a home sugar-monitoring device.
The diabetic who is on an intensive schedule usually pricks his or
her finger a minimum of four times and an ideal of seven times per day:
before each meal and at bedtime, plus ideally an hour after each meal.38
Although tight control makes a profound difference for
the Type I diabetic, it is a much more cumbersome and expensive process in
the short run. Many have felt
that the DCCT results could be extended to apply to Type II diabetics; this
interpretation is not based on any facts obtained from that study.
In my opinion, we should not be too quick to try to
rigorously control the blood sugars of a Type II diabetic with an intensive
insulin program. In addition to
the time, expense, and discomfort involved in finger pricks and multiple
injections, there are even more pressing concerns. Before we look at those concerns, some words of explanation
are in order. Although Type II
diabetics are called “non-insulin dependent,” remember, this simply
means that they do not have a life or death need for insulin shots.
Many doctors nonetheless put these individuals on insulin to
better control their blood sugars. In
fact, the National Institutes of Health indicate that 50 percent of known
Type II diabetics in America are either using insulin alone or insulin in
combination with oral medications.39 This
greatly confuses many in lay circles. They erroneously think that just because someone is on
insulin, they are a Type I diabetic. More
often than not, a diabetic who is on insulin has the Type II variety.
After all, estimates are that there are over 3.5 million
insulin-using Type II diabetics in our nation.
This compares with only 800,000 Type I diabetics in total.40 Now that
we have paused to recognize that many Type II diabetics use insulin, we need
to look at one of the most worrisome problems with this practice.
It is what I call “the vicious cycle of insulin use.”
The cycle begins with a sobering fact: using insulin aggressively
stimulates weight gain. In the DCCT, the average participant on the intensive program weighed 10 pounds
more than the control subjects after 5 years.41
This is especially ominous for the Type II diabetic.
Type I diabetics are often thinner and more resistant to weight gain
relative to the Type IIs. However,
some tend to gain weight after the onset of the disease. Type IIs often have overweight problems at the onset of
diabetes, and experience further weight gain as the disease progresses.
In my medical experience, when I am asked to see a Type
II diabetic who has been placed on insulin to try to improve blood sugar
control, I generally expect them to have gained a significant amount of
weight. This introduces the
next part of that vicious cycle. Weight
gain contributes to the Type II diabetic’s resistance to the effects of
insulin; thus, as weight increases so do insulin needs.
The cycle comes full circle when insulin dosages are further
increased, only to stimulate further weight gain.
The significance of this dilemma has been appreciated by the National
Institutes of Health. Because
of the tendency of intensive insulin therapy to promote weight gain, they
have stated, “Intensive treatment may not be appropriate for diabetics who
are overweight,”42 which includes most Type II diabetics.
The tight control of diabetes with insulin also
introduces other problems. The
DCCT study participants ran a much higher risk of low blood sugar
(hypoglycemic) reactions than those who were not practicing intensive
therapy. Although hypoglycemia is usually no more than a physically
uncomfortable inconvenience, severe reactions can actually be life
threatening.
At this point, someone may point out: yes, there are
problems with insulin therapy for the Type II diabetic, but is it possible
for these individuals to keep their blood sugars in an ideal range by using
oral medication—without all the finger sticks and insulin? It is true that early in the course of the disease it is
often possible for a Type II diabetic to use medication to optimally control
their sugars. However, over
time, the oral medications often become insufficient to keep blood sugars in
the tight control range demanded by intensive treatment.
Even if blood sugars can be controlled with pills by
mouth, this does not prove the wisdom of using them.
Although I do use oral medications in some of my diabetic patients,
the practice is part of one of the longest standing controversies in
medicine. The main drugs that
continue to be used for blood sugar control belong to a class called the
sulfonylureas. Common drugs in
this family include Diabeta, Micronase, Glucotrol, Glynase, Amaryl and
Diabinese. Today, if you look up any of these drugs in the Physician’s
Desk Reference, you will find a warning in bold print entitled “Special
warning on increased risk of cardiovascular mortality.”43
That warning goes on to explain the findings of a study published
back in 1970 by what was called the University Group Diabetes Program (UGDP).
Researchers found that diabetics who took Tolbutamide, an oral pill
used in the study, had more than double the risk of dying from heart disease
as those who treated their diabetes with diet alone.
Today, some urge that the drugs in this family are vastly different
now than the Tolbutamide of the 1960s.
However, the FDA still requires that even the newest drugs in this
class carry a bold print warning that reads, “Although only one drug in
the sulfonylurea class (Tolbutamide) was included in this [UGDP] study, it
is prudent from a safety standpoint to consider that this warning may also
apply to other oral hypoglycemic drugs in this class, in view of their close
similarities in mode of action and chemical structure.”
Some of the newer medications for diabetes such as Precose and
Glucophage are not in the same class and have differing mechanisms of
action. Thus they may be less
likely to increase the risk of heart disease, although they have not been on
the market long enough to make a firm determination in this regard.
My conclusion, based on published medical research and
my personal experience, is that careful blood sugar control is important in
Type II diabetics. However, the
use of insulin and oral agents in these individuals carries the potential to
do more harm than good. Thus,
the most important question in my mind always is: how can I help my Type II
diabetic patients control their sugars without drugs?
Such an approach stands to reduce the complications of high blood
sugars while decreasing the risk of problems from treatment.
Non-Drug Approach Brings Startling Results
Many seem to think that using a non-drug approach would
increase the risk of diabetic complications and decrease the likelihood of
attaining optimal blood sugar control.
Ironically, the evidence suggests that the opposite is true: an
optimal lifestyle program seems to help many diabetics more than any drugs
available. One recent example
of the power of a comprehensive lifestyle program comes from Weimar
Institute in California. Researchers
there studied the benefits of a live-in 25-day comprehensive lifestyle
program on Type II diabetic patients. A
frequent complication of diabetes is peripheral neuropathy, a condition that
often manifests itself as burning or aching sensations in the feet and legs
and may also involve the hands and arms.
The pain is often described as excruciating and sharp.
The disease can later progress to numbness, as heat, cold, and pain
can no longer be felt in the affected areas.
Although medications may sometimes help the condition, they often
make no significant impact. The
study’s lead researcher was Dr. Milton Crane (an endocrinologist who
specializes in reversing the effects of diabetes through lifestyle changes).
He showed that a meatless diet, free from all animal products and
high in unrefined total vegetarian foods, will bring complete relief to
painful neuropathy in over 80 percent of diabetics with this condition in
just 4 to 16 days.44 Other
elements of the program included: regular exercise, hydrotherapy treatments,
cooking classes, group lectures, exclusion of a variety of beverages
(coffee, tea, and alcohol), exclusion of tobacco, and for those who desired
it, religious counseling. Previously,
diabetic neuropathy was thought to be incurable. This study shows that the condition can actually be reversed
through a comprehensive lifestyle program that includes diet and exercise.
Blood sugars and cholesterol also dramatically improved on this diet.
The benefits of complete relief of diabetic painful neuropathy
continued according to a one to four year follow-up program.45
Keeping blood sugars as close to normal as possible is
one of the keys to kidney health in the diabetic.
A comprehensive lifestyle approach will greatly assist this process.
Furthermore, an optimal diet, which is total vegetarian, generally
has much less protein in it than the standard American fare.
Such a lower protein diet tends to put less stress on the kidneys,
again providing a boon to kidney health46 (see Chapter 7, “The Great Meat
and Protein Myth,” for more information).
Not only can a comprehensive lifestyle program help accomplish these
goals, but such a broad-based lifestyle approach will also likely diminish
other risk factors that could in time further worsen kidney function.
Examples of some of the other factors that can worsen
diabetic kidney problems include high blood pressure, cigarette smoking, and
elevated blood fats (LDL cholesterol and triglycerides).47
One little-recognized factor that also seems to increase the risk of
kidney problems in diabetics is the use of Tylenol or other brands of
acetaminophen. Studies show
that using as little as two pills once a week doubled the risk of severe
kidney disease in diabetic patients.48
Controlling diabetes pain with an approach like that used at Weimar
would be expected to result in a decrease or elimination of the need of such
drugs among affected diabetics.
Exercise - First Element
Needed in a Comprehensive Diabetes Lifestyle Program
Exercise plays a powerful role in lowering blood sugar
levels. Evidence suggests that
muscles in motion reduce resistance to insulin; that is, insulin sensitivity
is improved by regular physical exercise.49
More simply put, exercise—in a sense—works like insulin in a
diabetic: it helps sugar go out of the blood and into the muscle tissue.
In fact, the prestigious Joslin’s Diabetes Medical textbook
indicates that lack of exercise is “a key factor” in the development of
insulin resistance as people get older.50
Since diabetics need insulin on a daily basis (either their own
body’s insulin or injected insulin) so do diabetics need daily exercise to
optimally control their blood sugars and their disease.
Exercise not only helps diabetics control their blood
sugars, it also helps non-diabetics decrease their risk of ever developing
diabetes in the first place. One
study showed that exercise dramatically decreased the risk of developing
diabetes among those who were at high risk for the disease.51 As the amount of energy expended in exercise increased from
500 calories per week to 3500 calories per week, the risk of developing
diabetes dropped by 48 percent. In
other words, regular exercise nearly cut the risk of developing diabetes in
half, as shown in Figure 4:
Exercise and Risk of Diabetes . Interestingly, those who were at the
highest risk of developing diabetes benefited the most from regular
exercise. Individuals
classified as high risk in this study included those who were overweight,
had a family history of diabetes, or had high blood pressure. The bottom
line is that exercise is important for everyone.
However, it is especially critical for the diabetic and for those at
high risk of developing the disease.
Proper Diet - Second Element in a Comprehensive Diabetes
Lifestyle Program
Until recently, diabetics were told that in order to
control their blood sugars they had to eliminate most of the carbohydrates
from their diet. They were told
to avoid sugar, but the message did not stop there.
Plant foods—naturally rich in complex carbohydrates—were also on
the “hit list.” The result
left diabetics gravitating to a heavy meat diet.52
The medical community did not realize at that time what we have
already noted; namely, a high protein diet promotes kidney destruction. With heavy meat consumption also came increased ingestion of
cholesterol and saturated fat. Galloping
atherosclerosis then followed close behind.
“Missing the forest for the trees” was certainly true in this
case. The trees were the high
blood sugars, the forest was the whole patient.
Yes, eating a low carbohydrate (high meat) diet can control the blood
sugars, but the number one cause of death among diabetics is heart and blood
vessel disease. In fact, the
American Heart Association has gone on record that fully 80 percent of
diabetics die of some form of heart or blood vessel disease.53
The root cause of heart and blood vessel disease is atherosclerosis.
This process is, of course, accelerated by meat with its high content
of cholesterol and saturated fat. Ironically,
then, by treating his or her blood sugar with a high meat diet, a diabetic
may likely trade the control of blood sugar for an early death from heart
disease. Since it is the
complications and afflictions of diabetes that need to be particularly
avoided (not just the control of blood sugars) the diet needs to be tailored
to avoid or treat these complications as well as control the blood sugar.
Obesity is often one of the main determinants of
insulin resistance (the primary cause of Type II diabetes). Thus it is imperative for an obese diabetic to lose weight if
control of the disease is to be obtained by lifestyle changes alone.
Meat is also dense in calories and makes weight loss more difficult.
On the other hand, whole fruits, vegetables, and grains (without
fatty toppings) are much less dense in calories, thus facilitating an
excellent weight loss program.
Meat and Death from Diabetes
Notwithstanding the fact that meat can help control
blood sugars in diabetics, a large Southern California study done among
Seventh-day Adventists showed that those that ate meat six or more times per
week were at 3.8 times greater risk of dying from diabetes than those who
ate meat less than once per week, as illustrated in Figure 5: Meat and Death from Diabetes .54 Other research indicates
an additional benefit to diabetics who avoid meat and animal products.
These animal-derived items have no fiber in them whatsoever.
And fiber is emerging as a critical ingredient in the control of
blood sugar. In fact, some are
suggesting that an abundant supply of fiber is one of the main reasons that
a vegetarian diet benefits diabetics.
Fiber Facts
Fiber is a term that refers to plant constituents that
are resistant to human digestive enzymes.55
Almost all of the different types of fiber are actually indigestible
carbohydrates (the only exception is a fiber called lignin).56
Some of the other fiber types include cellulose, hemicellulose,
pectins, and gums.57 Fiber is
generally classified as either soluble (dissolves in water) or insoluble.
As we will see shortly, these two types of fibers have different
benefits. One of the bonuses of eating a balanced diet of natural plant
foods is that we tend to get liberal amounts of both the soluble and
insoluble fibers.
There are many foods rich in fiber.
A high content of insoluble fiber is found in wheat (especially the
bran) and bananas. Foods strong
in soluble fiber include most fruits, vegetables, legumes (fresh or dried),
oats, brown rice, and barley. Most
foods that are strong in soluble fiber are also strong in insoluble fiber.
Examples of foods high in fiber are shown in Figure
6: Good Sources of Soluble and Insoluble Fiber .58
Fiber, Insulin, and Blood Sugar
Research makes evident that foods that are high in
fiber lead to a slower rise in blood sugar, and as a result, require less
insulin to handle the meal.59 Fiber,
especially soluble fiber like the pectins and gums, slows the emptying of
food from the stomach60 and helps to slow the absorption of simple sugars in
the small intestine.61 This
should be contrasted with high fat meals that can result in high blood
glucose levels for up to 5 hours after the meal.62
Addition of these types of fibers to the diet has been
demonstrated to improve diabetes control.63
Indeed, eating a low fat, high fiber, vegetarian diet keeps blood
sugars low even when fruits are eaten.
Dr. James Anderson and colleagues at the University of Kentucky found
that by using a high carbohydrate and high fiber diet, the need for insulin
was greatly reduced. Blood
sugar control was better and fasting levels of cholesterol and triglycerides
fell. These and other benefits
of the high carbohydrate, high fiber diet are listed in Figure 7: Diabetic Benefits of a High-Carbohydrate,
High-Fiber Diet .64, 65, 66
Many nutrition experts recommend that our diets should
contain between 20 and 35 grams of fiber per day when it comes to issues
like cancer prevention.67 However,
even higher amounts of fiber seem optimal for diabetes control.
Studies that demonstrate consistent decreases in insulin requirements
by improving fasting and post-meal blood sugar levels have used between 25
and 35 grams of fiber for every 1000 calories eaten.68
This can easily bring daily fiber consumption into the range of 50 to
100 grams per day.
Consumption of soluble fiber also appears to be
important in non-diabetics. As
we have already noted, whether or not a person has diabetes, these fibers
prevent the rapid rise in blood sugar, with a resulting lower peak level.
Therefore, insulin requirements are actually decreased when these
fibers are added to the diet.69 This is no small matter.
As important as insulin is in controlling our blood sugar, ongoing
research demonstrates that higher blood insulin levels increase the speed at
which the blockages of atherosclerosis develop.70, 71 Thus, we should help
our bodies by placing fewer demands for high insulin output.
One way we can do this is by eating less sugar and choosing more
fiber-rich foods.
One group of non-diabetics that may especially benefit
from the insulin-sparing effects of a high-fiber vegetarian diet consists of
those with high blood pressure. Individuals
with elevated blood pressure (so called “essential hypertension”), even
if they are not overweight and not diabetic, tend to have tissues that are
less sensitive to insulin.72 The
body responds to this lack of tissue sensitivity by making more insulin to
get the job done. Therefore, if
hypertensives adopt a better diet, their blood vessel walls will be exposed
to a reduced amount of insulin.
Other Benefits from Fiber
Fiber from plant foods helps dilute, bind, inactivate,
and remove toxic substances and carcinogens found in our food supply.
Fiber helps prevent colon cancer, and may help against several other
cancers as well.73 A diet rich
in fiber helps in healing peptic ulcer disease.74
Fiber is effective in curing and preventing chronic constipation.
It can also be effective in curing chronic diarrhea.
We have come a long way since fiber gained worldwide
attention in 1970. It was then
that Dr. Denis Burkitt, a renowned British physician, published a report
that very effectively sounded the alarm.
He observed that in countries where diets include large amounts of
fiber, there were few cases of the many degenerative diseases common in the
Western world today. These
diseases are listed in Figure
8: Diseases Associated with a Low Fiber Diet .75
Remember, fiber is found only in plant foods such as
fruits, vegetables, grains, and nuts. Fiber
is not present in any animal products.
There is no fiber in meat, milk, eggs, or cheese.
Yes, a cow eats plenty of fiber and is a vegetarian by nature, but it
retains no fiber in its flesh or its milk.
More on Proper
Diet: Meal
Timing on an Optimal Lifestyle Program
Most people do not realize that their glucose tolerance
decreases as the day progresses. This
means that toward evening, your body’s ability to handle sugar decreases.
In a study of subjects with Type II diabetes, absolute blood sugar
levels were 10 to 15 percent higher when eating six times a day (three meals
and three snacks) compared to just three meals a day.76
Years ago, before very precise insulin types were available, a snack
at bedtime was recommended for diabetics because the insulin levels peaked
in the middle of the sleep period. The
bedtime snack helped prevent hypoglycemia, or low blood sugar.
Today, with the types of insulin available, this is not only
unnecessary, but counterproductive. Our
heaviest meal should be in the morning, emphasizing fruits and grains.
This prepares us for the most active part of the day. A substantial meal for lunch, including several servings of
vegetables, is also important. As
the day progresses, our ability to handle blood sugar decreases, so a
lighter meal in the evening (ideally, for obese Type II diabetics, no
evening meal) with no refined sugar is the best rule to follow.
Asking your doctor to tailor your insulin injections so that this
program can be followed can produce great benefits.
Is Sugar OK for the Diabetic?
Many doctors who treat diabetes seem to have grown more
lenient about sugar consumption. Therefore,
it is not uncommon for diabetic patients to walk away with the idea that
eating sugar “in moderation” is OK.
This seemed to be the attitude of Lois, a 75-year-old
Type II diabetic. Although she
was taking about 50 units of insulin per day she saw no problem with an
occasional ice cream. There was
a major wrinkle, however; Lois had what I would call an addictive
relationship with ice cream. She
could not control her consumption of that high fat, high sugar “treat.” When she adopted a healthful program, she left out her ice
cream and made other healthful changes in her lifestyle. Consequently, she lost weight and saw her insulin needs drop
by over 60 percent in less than three weeks.
Part of Lois’ success was due to the fact that she finally faced
the realization that high sugar foods were a real problem for her and her
diabetes.
What Other Problems Does Sugar Present?
It is important to recognize that when eaten apart from
fiber, simple sugars are associated with dental cavities, obesity, high
triglycerides, malnutrition, and decreased resistance to disease.
This is true whether the simple sugar is in the form of white sugar,
brown sugar, honey, molasses, corn syrup, maple syrup, milk, or fruit juice.
Furthermore, there is concern that higher amounts of sugar in the
blood can combine with LDL cholesterol to produce a compound that is
damaging to the lining of blood vessel walls, thus stimulating
atherosclerosis. This “glycated LDL” (LDL combined with sugar) may become
oxidized LDL that increases the risk of heart disease.77 See Chapter 3, “Heart Disease—Conquering the Leading
Killer,” for information on the problems with oxidized cholesterol.
Refined sugar has effects that also impact our quality
of life. A high sugar diet and
the consuming of fruit juices and sodas increase the severity of
premenstrual syndrome symptoms in college girls.78
Sugar also may decrease cognitive or intellectual function,
especially in children.79 Some
hypothesize that the reason for this mental deterioration is a result of the
body overreacting to refined sugar consumption.
A load of sugar stimulates the pancreas to release excessive amounts
of insulin, which in turn leads in a few hours to a blood sugar that is
lower than normal.80 Therefore,
children may get poor grades on their tests although they are well prepared.
Eating natural but not refined sugar, such as is found in apples,
oranges, pears, etc., should be encouraged because these foods are packed
with nutrients, including fiber, along with the unrefined sugar.
At the risk of being redundant, let me reiterate: fiber slows the
rate of simple sugar absorption, allowing utilization of the energy from the
food we eat at a steadier rate.
One classic study examined the effects of eating apples
in one of three different physical forms: as whole apples, as applesauce, or
as apple juice. Even though the
same number of calories was consumed from each preparation, eating the
apples kept blood sugars steadier than drinking apple juice or using
applesauce alone. The change of
blood sugar levels through a period time after eating apples in the three
forms is shown in Figure 9:
Effects of Food Processing on Blood Glucose Levels .81
Note that the blood sugar levels peaked for all three
at the same level 30 minutes after eating.
Then all levels decreased as sharply as they rose, but each to a
different low point. The level
for the apple juice consumer fell the lowest, to 50.
The level for the applesauce eater went down to 61, while the whole
apple eater had a high 66 level as his lowest point. The raw apple eater’s level stayed constant at the high
level for the remaining two hours, while the level for the other two stayed
at lower values. Although this
study was done in non-diabetics, the blood sugar peaks are more pronounced
(higher) in diabetics consuming the juice or sauce in comparison with the
whole apple, thus indicating that the natural whole apple will produce a
steadier blood glucose that the body can more easily handle.
This study demonstrates that eating food in its natural state is the
safest and—ultimately—the most satisfying way to enjoy sugar.
More on Sugar and Diabetes
Another concern with sugar for the diabetic is that
sugar itself provides plenty of calories, but very little in the way of
trace minerals and other nutrients. There
are growing concerns that certain minerals may help with diabetes control.
Two examples are zinc and vanadium.82
Other minerals and vitamins suggested to have an important role in
diabetes include magnesium, manganese, chromium, potassium, and pyridoxine
(vitamin B6).83 The more you
fill up on sugar, the less capacity you will generally have for the
nutrient-rich foods like fruits, grains, and vegetables.
Sugar and the Immune System
Researchers performed a series of studies that examined
how sugar consumption weakens the ability of white blood cells to destroy
bacteria. The studies showed
that the capacity for white blood cells to destroy bacteria is weakened as
sugar consumption rises. Results
of the white blood cell study are tabulated in Figure 10: Sugar Weakens White Blood Cells' Ability to Kill Bacteria .84
Note that if a person consumed no sugar for 12 hours,
each white blood cell could destroy an average of fourteen bacteria.
If that same individual ate the equivalent of six teaspoons of sugar
(such as found in a half-cup of pudding or a mere two ounces of candy85),
each white blood cell could only eliminate ten bacteria—a 25 percent
decrease in killing power. Progressive
deterioration in the white cells’ bacteria fighting capacities beyond 25
percent occurred when 12 teaspoons and then 18 teaspoons were ingested.
When 24 teaspoons of sugar were consumed (the amount in a medium
piece of cheesecake or a milk shake86), the white blood cells were so
compromised that they could only destroy an average of one bacterium each.
That represents a 92 percent reduction.
This effect is similar to what happens in a diabetic who has
uncontrolled high blood sugars. This
provides one explanation why diabetics frequently get foot infections and
other types of infections. Keeping
a healthy immune system is simply a personal choice that each one of us is
free to make.
The above study provides further insight into why the
immune system is weakened when blood sugar levels rise in diabetics.
The researchers further demonstrated that sugar’s impairing effects
on white blood cells are not short-lived.
The impairment lasted a full five hours in normal subjects.87
This means that during that five-hour period the white blood cells
could not perform optimally. When
you consider how often throughout the day some people consume sugar, it
becomes apparent that their white cells are not functioning very effectively
for many hours of each day. These
researchers also discovered an interesting sidelight: a 36 hour fast seemed
to significantly increase the ability of the white blood cells to kill off
bacteria. When you are sick and
not hungry, it may thus be to your advantage to avoid eating, or at least to
eat very sparingly for a day or two.
One other sobering linkage involves sugar and cancer.88
A number of different cancers have been statistically linked to sugar
consumption in scientific studies. A
listing of these cancers is shown in Figure 11:
Eight Cancers Linked to Sugar Consumption .
There are a number of theories why these linkages
exist; however, a full explanation for them is not yet clear.
However, the data that is available provides an additional reason to
think seriously about being aware of your intake of sugar, and making
adjustments as indicated.
In light of all this research it is interesting to note
the cautions of Ellen White. Over
a hundred years ago she wrote: “…sugar, when largely used, is more
injurious than meat.”89 Predating White by many centuries, the Holy
Scriptures also recorded reservations about simple sugars.
Although honey was mentioned, the principle seems to apply with equal
force to any simple sugar: “It
is not good to eat much honey.” Proverbs
25:27.
Americans are beginning to heed the warnings regarding
meat, but somehow we have failed to make it clear that sugar at the levels
consumed by the average American may be, in some respects, even more harmful
than consuming meat. The
emerging data on sugar suggests that we should not take lightly the counsel
of modern day scientists that concur with the reservations voiced by the
Scriptures and Ellen White about the dangers of excessive sugar intake.
Sugar, indeed, seems to be a problem for most Americans, whether
diabetic or not.
Is Sugar Consumption Really a Problem for Me?
If you are like most Americans, you are eating large
amounts of sugar without even realizing it.
The average U.S. citizen eats over 147 pounds of sugar each year.90
This translates into a whopping 46 teaspoons per day.
The trends are even more disturbing.
Americans today are eating nearly 70 percent more sugar than their
grandparents did in 1909.91 Despite
all the emphasis on healthier living and healthier eating, since 1970 the
average American yearly sugar consumption has continued to increase by 25
pounds.92 One reason for this
is that even while we may speak more about health, Americans are consuming
more candy and soft drinks per person today than ever before.93
These foods seem to be replacing the healthful cereal
grains. While the average U.S.
citizen in 1909 ate 300 pounds of flour and cereal products, today we
average only 199 pounds annually.94 All
told, 38 percent of the total carbohydrates in the American diet now come
from refined sugars. This
compares to 40 percent of our total carbohydrates coming from grain.95
There is cause for serious concern in view of the problems associated
with so much sugar in the diet.
Virtually no one eats 46 teaspoons per day from the
sugar bowl. How is it possible,
then, to consume this much sugar? Most
of the sugar in our diet is “hidden.”
Its presence in the foods we eat often goes unnoticed. Some of these hidden sources are listed in
Figure
12: Hidden Sugars in Foods (Teaspoons) .96
Notice that one of the main sources of hidden sugar is
soft drinks or soda pop. Soft
drinks were unknown until modern times.
However, in 1994 the average American consumed 52.2 gallons of soft
drinks, with 40 gallons of it in the form of regular (non- diet)
beverages.97 This amounts to the equivalent of 427 twelve ounce cans per
year, or more than one per day for every man, woman, and child.
Since a typical non-diet soft drink packs 150 calories,98 each year
the average American consumes over 64,000 calories of sugar from soft drinks
alone. This is no small matter
when you recognize that it takes only 3,500 excess calories in our diet to
gain one pound.
What nutritional qualities do soft drinks contain?
Very little. They are the source of a liberal amount of simple
carbohydrates that must be classified as “empty calories.”
In fact, they aptly illustrate what an empty calorie food is: it
contains many calories but is largely devoid of vitamins and minerals.
What, then, makes soda pop so popular?
It is tasty and cheap, well advertised, and available almost
everywhere. Furthermore, many
soft drinks are caffeinated, making them part of an addictive process.
Complex
Carbohydrates: A Better Choice than Sugar
The main sources of food energy originate from three
categories of nutrients: carbohydrate, fat, and protein.
The body can most easily convert carbohydrate into energy for our
everyday activities. Sweet,
empty calorie foods give the blood sugar a quick boost, but this rise is not
sustained. To the contrary, we
have learned that the boost may be followed by a sharp drop in blood sugar.
We would do well to make carbohydrates the largest percentage of our
diet, but not the empty calorie ones. Our
energy should come from quality carbohydrates (called “complex”
carbohydrates) like natural fruits, grains, and vegetables.
We have already looked in detail at many of the benefits of foods
with these kinds of carbohydrates—one of the most important being that
they tend to be packed with liberal amounts of fiber along with other
nutrients.
The conclusion is that for diabetics and non-diabetics
alike, complex carbohydrates should make up the major part of a healthful
diet. Most Americans consume 10
to 15 percent of their calories from protein, (eight percent would be more
healthful), and plant sources of protein are the best.
An ideal amount of fat consumption is approximately 25 percent of
calories with an emphasis on the unsaturated and omega-3 fats.
One recent study from Australia has shown that a diet high in
monounsaturated fat (such as is found in olive oil) using 38 percent total
fat and 21 percent monounsaturated fat can adequately control blood sugars
in diabetics without adversely affecting the cholesterol and triglycerides,
as long as the total calorie intake remains controlled.99
Figure 13: Foods High in Monounsaturated Fats lists
foods that are high in monounsaturated fat .100
Carbohydrates should make up the bulk of the diet at
approximately 55 to 70 percent. They
provide the most efficient and readily available source of energy for our
bodies. The brain and nervous
system tissues use carbohydrates almost exclusively for energy.
Carbohydrates will act to detoxify harmful substances that are
manufactured by or taken into our bodies.
Complex carbohydrates are abundant in vegetables as well as in whole
grains such as rice, whole grain pasta, and potatoes.
A diet rich in complex carbohydrates and fiber is also
the best way to address the problem of obesity, which, as previously
mentioned, is one of the major reasons for the insensitivity to insulin that
characterizes diabetes. In
fact, the Joslin Diabetes Center’s textbook states:
“the most common and important cause of insulin resistance is
obesity.”101 That may be why,
as important as exercise is in an overweight individual, weight loss seems
to be even more important, at least in preventing heart disease, improving
HDL cholesterol (the good cholesterol), and in reducing blood pressure and
blood sugars.102 There is,
however, an old myth in America that says that if you eat starchy foods you
will gain weight. The fact is,
starchy foods in moderate amounts should be part of a weight loss diet.
The extra fats and calories that we add to the starchy foods make
them fattening.
For example, it would take 60 potatoes to equal the
amount of fat in one tablespoon of butter.
One medium sized potato has only 145 calories and a mere trace of
fat, 2/10 of a gram. If we add
just one tablespoon of butter, that one potato jumps up to 247 calories with
12 grams of fat.103
Eating a liberal supply of complex carbohydrate and
fiber-rich fruits, whole grains, and vegetables will go a long way to
provide benefits beyond improving blood sugars.
As we have seen, these foods have a desirable short-term effect in
decreasing insulin needs. But
they also have long-term benefits, in that they form the optimal diet for
weight loss. When combined with
regular exercise and optimal meal timing (people lose more weight if they
eat lightly—or not at all—in the evening), such a diet can help the
overweight diabetic to shed a significant number of pounds. As the weight comes down, so do the insulin needs.
Artificial Sweeteners
What about artificial sweeteners? Today many believe artificial sweeteners are a good
alternative to sugar in everything from soft drinks to cakes and candies
because they contain fewer calories. NutraSweet,
for example, is the brand name of a synthetic amino acid called aspartame.
In small amounts it can mimic the taste of sugar.
Do the low calorie soft drinks really work?
Current research says “no.”
In fact, those who drink the most diet drinks have the most problems
with their weight. And it seems to be more than just a situation where heavier
people are choosing lower calorie items.
One study of over 75,000 women ages 50 to 69 found that users of
artificial sweeteners were significantly more likely than non-users to gain
weight over time.104 In another
study, 30 volunteers drank four diet sodas daily for two weeks.
Surprisingly, these diet soda users ate more food and gained more
weight than when they were free to drink regular sugar-sweetened soft
drinks. Researcher Michael
Tordoff reported that artificial sweeteners increase the appetite.
“We found that hunger increases after drinking just a liter of
aspartame sweetened soda,” he said.105
Simply put, artificial sweeteners just seem to increase the desire
for the real sweeteners. This is a problem of obvious significance.
In our country, an average of over 20 pounds of artificial sweeteners
are consumed per person per year,106 but despite this increase in
consumption of artificial sweeteners, actual sugar consumption continues to
rise.
A Better Alternative
Research studies as well as my personal experience as a
physician make an eloquent point: if we adopt new and better ways of eating
and living—and stick with them—we will likely develop an enjoyment for
that new lifestyle. In other
words, instead of continuing to eat foods that are characterized by
excessive sweetness, regardless of whether the sweet taste comes from sugar
or from artificial sweeteners, why not let your taste develop for foods that
are naturally sweet? Try to
find more enjoyment in a crisp apple, a ripe banana, or perhaps even a
homegrown carrot or a garden-fresh squash.
Our taste buds are trainable.
Although I can think of many examples among my patients
of “trainable taste buds,” there is one example from someone who is not
my patient that is especially “close to home”—my father.
When I was growing up in Michigan, my father, although not a
diabetic, was suffering from a number of minor health problems. As a mechanical engineer, he was not acquainted with medical
or health subjects. He happened
across a book called “Sugar Blues” and became convinced that his
overweight condition and health problems were related to his high sugar
intake. He had always been an
avid milkshake drinker, and an ardent consumer of Reese’s peanut butter
cups and chocolate covered cherries, among other sugary foods.
One evening he intrigued the family by announcing he had decided to
give up refined sugar entirely. My
mother, however, continued to cook for our family the way she always did.
When it came time for the dessert, my father would leave and go work
in the garden. When he came
home from work and chocolate-chip cookies were baking he would go outside
and do some chore to avoid the aroma and accompanying temptation.
We all quietly wondered how long he could continue with his decision.
After about four months, my father came home and
another sweet dessert was baking, but the appeal and desire were no longer
present. In fact, he described
the odor as a “sickening sweet.” He
now enjoyed apple pies made without sugar (my mother finally broke down and
would make him desserts with no refined sugar) as much as he had enjoyed his
former desserts. My uncle, who
would frequently visit us from Texas, commented on how it was worth the trip
just to see how “Bud” obviously relished and delighted in plain simple
foods. My father’s weight
came down and his health problems disappeared, but his enjoyment for food
and life, if anything, improved. As
a young boy, this obvious “before and after” difference that I had
observed in my own father launched my interest in lifestyle and health.
Although it required disciplined sacrifice for a few months, the
results demonstrate that taste buds can be trained for the better.
Putting It All
Together: Principles of Diabetic Nutrition
Many of my diabetic patients request that I give them a
very specific menu that will help control their diabetes. However, for most diabetics, menus are not as important as
knowing (and practicing) the dietary principles of diabetic control.
This is especially true for the non-insulin dependent Type II
diabetic. The principles are
really very basic—we have looked at all of them in this chapter.
The more natural fruits, vegetables, and whole grains the better
(nuts are also good in moderation). The
less meat and dairy products the better.
The less refined sugar the better.
The more fiber the better. Eat
a good breakfast and little if any supper.
If you are overweight it is of utmost importance that you reduce your
weight to your ideal weight (thus, the less fat in the diet the better) and
follow an eating style that allows you to attain and maintain this
reasonable weight. Aerobic
exercise, at least 30 minutes in duration, should be part of the daily
diabetic routine.
I am happy to provide my patients with delicious
recipes incorporating the balanced low fat, low sugar, high fiber vegetarian
diet that is best for diabetes. I
avoid giving them a menu, however. Once
they understand the principles, I let them thoughtfully plan their own
meals. I would give the same
advice to each reader. Do not
feel bound to some restrictive way of eating.
Take the principles to heart. Experiment
with different options. You
will be surprised at how enjoyable a healthy lifestyle can really be.
The Surprising Truth - Even for Non-Diabetics
Some people find it hard to believe this simple truth:
the diabetic lifestyle I have been describing is also the best lifestyle for
non-diabetics. Whether you are
concerned about preventing diabetes or merely trying to optimize your
health, this program will also pay you rich dividends.
And you will not have to sacrifice pleasure either.
Almost every day at the Lifestyle Center of America in
Oklahoma you will find diabetics enrolled in our live-in programs for the
purpose of reversing their disease process.
You will also find some others—individuals from the surrounding
communities who come to enjoy a meal in our dining room.
They are often eating the very same fare that the diabetic across the
room is enjoying.
Often our fear of change is largely driven by
ignorance. Pick up a good
cookbook or find a friend who can make some tasty meatless entrees, and
embark today on a more vegetarian-type of eating program.
A list of cookbooks that specialize in healthful menus can be found
in Appendix II. You will find
what our neighbors around the Lifestyle Center of America have found: food
can taste good, your life can have enjoyment, and you can still be on the
finest diet and lifestyle to reverse, control, or prevent diabetes, in
addition to reducing your risk of many other diseases.
References
1
This is the new diagnostic criteria.
Report of the Expert Committee on the Diagnosis and Classification of
Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetes Care
1997 July;20(7):1183-1197.
2
Harris MI. Summary.
In: Harris MI, Cowie CC, et al, editors.
Diabetes in America—2nd edition.
National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and
Digestive and Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 1.
3
Harris MI. Summary.
In: Harris MI, Cowie CC, et al, editors.
Diabetes in America—2nd edition.
National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and
Digestive and Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 4.
4
Harris MI. Summary. In: Harris
MI, Cowie CC, et al, editors. Diabetes
in America—2nd edition. National
Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and
Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 1-13.
5
Nelson RG, Knowler WC, et al. Kidney
diseases in diabetics. In:
Harris MI, Cowie CC, et al, editors. Diabetes
in America—2nd edition. National
Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and
Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 358-361.
6
Kuller LH. Stroke and Diabetes.
In: Harris MI, Cowie CC, et al, editors.
Diabetes in America—2nd edition.
National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and
Digestive and Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 449-456.
7
US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening
for Diabetes Mellitus. In Guide
to Clinical Preventive Services—2nd edition.
Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins, 1996 p. 193-194.
8
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.
Diabetes Statistics. 1996. Http://www.niddk.nih.gov:80/DiabetesStatistics/DiabetesStatistics.html.
9
Cowie CC, Eberhardt MS editors. Diabetes
1996: Vital Statistics. American
Diabetes Association. 1996 p. 62.
10
Harris MI. Summary.
In: Harris MI, Cowie CC, et al, editors.
Diabetes in America—2nd edition.
National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and
Digestive and Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 8.
11
Palmberg P, Smith M, et al. The
natural history of retinopathy in insulin-dependent juvenile-onset diabetes.
Ophthalmology 1981 Jul;88(7):613-618.
12
Nelson RG, Knowler WC, et al. Kidney
diseases. In: Harris MI, Cowie
CC, et al, editors. Diabetes in
America—2nd edition. National
Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and
Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 359.
13
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.
Diabetes Statistics, 1996. Http://www.niddk.nih.gov:80/DiabetesStatistics/DiabetesStatistics.html
14
Nelson RG, Knowler WC, et al. Chapter 16:
Kidney diseases. In:
Harris MI, Cowie CC, et al, editors. Diabetes
in America—2nd edition. National
Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and
Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 360.
15
Nelson RG, Knowler WC, et al. Kidney
diseases. In: Harris MI, Cowie
CC, et al, editors. Diabetes in
America—2nd edition. National
Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and
Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 360.
16
Weiderpass E, Gridley G, et al. Risk
of endometrial and breast cancer in patients with diabetes mellitus.
Int J Cancer 1997 May 2;71(3):360-363.
17
Harris MI. Summary.
In: Harris MI, Cowie CC, et al, editors.
Diabetes in America—2nd edition.
National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and
Digestive and Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 11.
18
Bennett PH. Definition,
Diagnosis, And Classification Of Diabetes Mellitus And Impaired Glucose
Tolerance. In: Kahn CR, Weir
GC, et al, editors. Joslin’s
Diabetes Mellitus—13th edition. Malvern,
PA: Lea & Febiger 1994 p. 193-200.
19
Bennett PH. Definition,
Diagnosis, And Classification Of Diabetes Mellitus And Impaired Glucose
Tolerance. In: Kahn CR, Weir GC, et al, editors.
Joslin’s Diabetes Mellitus—13th edition.
Malvern, PA: Lea & Febiger 1994 p. 193-200.
20
Harris MI. Summary.
In: Harris MI, Cowie CC, et al, editors.
Diabetes in America—2nd edition.
National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and
Digestive and Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 3.
21
Cavallo MG, Fava D, et al. Cell-mediated immune response to beta casein in
recent-onset insulin-dependent diabetes: implications for disease
pathogenesis. Lancet 1996 Oct
5;348(9032):926-928.
22
Harris MI. Summary.
In: Harris MI, Cowie CC, et al, editors.
Diabetes in America—2nd edition.
National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and
Digestive and Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 1.
23
Bennett PH. Definition,
Diagnosis, And Classification Of Diabetes Mellitus And Impaired Glucose
Tolerance. In: Kahn CR, Weir
GC, et al, editors. Joslin’s
Diabetes Mellitus—13th edition. Malvern,
PA: Lea & Febiger 1994 p. 193-200.
24
Kenny SJ, Aubert RE, Geiss LS. Prevalence
and Incidence of Non-Insulin-Dependent Diabetes.
In: Harris MI, Cowie CC, et al, editors.
Diabetes in America—2nd edition.
National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and
Digestive and Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 47.
25
Harris MI. Summary.
In: Harris MI, Cowie CC, et al, editors.
Diabetes in America—2nd edition.
National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and
Digestive and Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 5.
26
Peters AL, Davidson MB. A
clinical approach for the diagnosis of diabetes mellitus: an analysis using
glycosylated hemoglobin levels. Meta-analysis Research Group on the
Diagnosis of Diabetes Using Glycated Hemoglobin Levels.
JAMA 1996 Oct 16;276(15):1246-1252.
27
Coustan DR. Gestational
Diabetes. In: Harris MI, Cowie
CC, et al, editors. Diabetes in
America—2nd edition. National
Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and
Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 703.
28
de Veciana M, Major CA, et al. Postprandial
versus preprandial blood glucose monitoring in women with gestational
diabetes mellitus requiring insulin therapy.
N Engl J Med 1995 Nov 9;333(19):1237-1241.
29
US Department of Health and Human Services.
Births, Monthly Vital Statistics Report, CDC 44(3) Suppl Sept 21,
1995 p. 1.
30
US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening
for Diabetes Mellitus. In:
Guide to Clinical Preventive Services—2nd edition.
Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins, 1996 p. 199-201.
31
Coustan DR. Gestational
Diabetes. In: Harris MI, Cowie
CC, et al, editors. Diabetes in
America—2nd edition. National
Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and
Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 712-713.
32
The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and
progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes
mellitus. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group.
N Engl J Med 1993 Sep 30;329(14):977-986.
33
The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and
progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes
mellitus. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group.
N Engl J Med 1993 Sep 30;329(14):977-986.
34
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.
Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT).
1996. Http://www.niddk.nih.gov/ DCCT / DCCT.html
35
Krolewski AS, Warram JH. Epidemiology
of Late Complications of Diabetes. In:
Kahn CR, Weir GC, et al, editors. Joslin’s
Diabetes Mellitus—13th edition. Malvern, PA: Lea & Febiger 1994 p. 606.
36
Beaser RS. Outsmarting
Diabetes: A Dynamic Approach
for Reducing the Effects of
Insulin-Dependent Diabetes. (Joslin
Diabetes Center Boston, MA). Minneapolis,
MN: Chronimed Publishing, 1994 p. 10-11.
37
Beaser RS. Outsmarting
Diabetes: A Dynamic Approach
for Reducing the Effects of
Insulin-Dependent Diabetes. (Joslin
Diabetes Center Boston, MA). Minneapolis,
MN: Chronimed Publishing, 1994 p. 13
38
Beaser RS. Outsmarting
Diabetes: A Dynamic Approach
for Reducing the Effects of
Insulin-Dependent Diabetes. (Joslin
Diabetes Center Boston, MA). Minneapolis,
MN: Chronimed Publishing, 1994 p. 31.
39
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.
Diabetes Statistics. 1996. Http://www.niddk.nih.gov:80/DiabetesStatistics/DiabetesStatistics.html
40
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.
Diabetes Statistics. 1996. Http://www.niddk.nih.gov:80/DiabetesStatistics/DiabetesStatistics.html
41
Beaser RS. Outsmarting
Diabetes: A Dynamic Approach
for Reducing the Effects of
Insulin-Dependent Diabetes. (Joslin
Diabetes Center Boston, MA). Minneapolis,
MN: Chronimed Publishing, 1994 p. 4.
42
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.
Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT).
1996. Http://www.niddk.nih.gov/ DCCT / DCCT.html
43
Physician’s Desk Reference (PDRŽ). 1996 50th —edition. (CD-ROM).
Montvealle, NJ: Medical Economics, 1996.
44
Crane MG, Sample C. Regression
of Diabetic Neuropathy with Total Vegetarian (Vegan) Diet.
J Nutritional Medicine 1994;4 :431-439.
45
Crane MG, Sample C. Regression
of Diabetic Neuropathy with Total Vegetarian (Vegan) Diet.
J Nutritional Medicine 1994;4 :431-439.
46
Brenner BM, Meyer TW, Hostetter TH. Dietary
protein intake and the progressive nature of kidney disease: the role of
hemodynamically mediated glomerular injury in the pathogenesis of
progressive glomerular sclerosis in aging, renal ablation, and intrinsic
renal disease. N Engl J Med
1982 Sep 9;307(11):652-659.
47
Nelson RG, Knowler WC, et al. Kidney
diseases. In: Harris MI, Cowie
CC, et al, editors. Diabetes in
America—2nd edition. National
Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and
Kidney Diseases; NIH
Publication No. 95-1468, 1995 p. 361-367.
48
Perneger TV, Whelton PK, Klag MJ. Risk
of kidney failure associated with the use of acetaminophen, aspirin, and
nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs. N
Engl J Med 1994 Dec 22;331(25):1675-1679.
49
O’Meara NM, Polonsky KS. Insulin
Secretion in vivo. In: Kahn CR,
Weir GC, et al, editors. Joslin’s
Diabetes Mellitus—13th edition. Malvern,
PA: Lea & Febiger 1994 p. 85-86.
50
O’Meara NM, Polonsky KS. Insulin
Secretion in vivo. In: Kahn CR,
Weir GC, et al, editors. Joslin’s
Diabetes Mellitus—13th edition. Malvern,
PA: Lea & Febiger 1994 p. 86.
51
Helmrich SP, Ragland DR, et al. Physical
activity and reduced occurrence of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus.
N Engl J Med 1991 Jul 18;325(3):147-152.
52
U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services.
Diabetes. In: The
Surgeon General’s Report on Nutrition and Health.
Public Health Service, Washington, D: DHHS Publication No. 88-50210,
1988 p. 250-253.
53
American Heart Association. 1997
Heart and Stroke Statistical Update. American
Heart Association, 1997 p. 25.
54
Snowdon DA, Phillips RL. Does a
vegetarian diet reduce the occurrence of diabetes?
Am J Public Health 1985 May;75(5):507-512.
55
Jenkins DJA. Carbohydrates: (B)
Dietary Fiber. In: Shils ME,
Young VR, editors. Modern
Nutrition in Health and Disease—7th edition.
Philadelphia, PA: Lea and Febiger, 1988 p. 52-53.
56
Jenkins DJA. Carbohydrates: (B)
Dietary Fiber. In: Shils ME,
Young VR, editors. Modern
Nutrition in Health and Disease—7th edition.
Philadelphia, PA: Lea and Febiger, 1988 p. 52-53.
57
Jenkins DJA. Carbohydrates: (B)
Dietary Fiber. In: Shils ME,
Young VR, editors. Modern
Nutrition in Health and Disease—7th edition.
Philadelphia, PA: Lea and Febiger, 1988 p. 52-55.
58
The Food Processor for Windows: Nutrition Analysis & Fitness Software
[computer program]. ESHA Research. Salem,
Oregon.
59
Beaser RS. Outsmarting
Diabetes: A Dynamic Approach
for Reducing the Effects of
Insulin-Dependent Diabetes. (Joslin
Diabetes Center Boston, MA). Minneapolis,
MN: Chronimed Publishing, 1994 p. 75.
60
Beaser RS. Outsmarting
Diabetes: A Dynamic Approach
for Reducing the Effects of
Insulin-Dependent Diabetes. (Joslin
Diabetes Center Boston, MA). Minneapolis,
MN: Chronimed Publishing, 1994 p. 87.
61
Jenkins DJA. Carbohydrates: (B)
Dietary Fiber. In: Shils ME,
Young VR, editors. Modern
Nutrition in Health and Disease—7th edition.
Philadelphia, PA: Lea and Febiger, 1988 p. 61-63.
62
Beaser RS. Outsmarting
Diabetes: A Dynamic Approach
for Reducing the Effects of
Insulin-Dependent Diabetes. (Joslin
Diabetes Center Boston, MA) Minneapolis, MN: Chronimed Publishing, 1994 p.
80.
63
Jenkins DJA. Carbohydrates: (B)
Dietary Fiber. In: Shils ME,
Young VR, editors. Modern
Nutrition in Health and Disease—7th edition.
Philadelphia, PA: Lea and Febiger, 1988 p. 61-63.
64
Anderson JW, Smith BM, Gustafson NJ. Health
benefits and practical aspects of high-fiber diets.
Am J Clin Nutr 1994 May;59(5 Suppl):1242S-1247S.
65
Anderson JW, Zeigler JA, et al. Metabolic
effects of high-carbohydrate, high-fiber diets for insulin-dependent
diabetic individuals. Am J Clin
Nutr 1991 Nov;54(5):936-943.
66
Anderson JW, Akanji AO. Dietary
fiber—an overview. Diabetes
Care 1991 Dec;14(12):1126-1131.
67
U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services.
Cancer. In: The Surgeon
General’s Report on Nutrition and Health.
Public Health Service, Washington, DC: DHHS Publication No. 88-50210,
1988 p. 192.
68
U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services.
Diabetes. In: The
Surgeon General’s Report on Nutrition and Health.
Public Health Service, Washington, DC: DHHS Publication No. 88-50210,
1988 p. 260-261.
69
Christiansen JS, Bonnevie-Nielsen V, et al.
Effect of guar gum on 24-hour insulin requirements of
insulin-dependent diabetic subjects as assessed by an artificial pancreas.
Diabetes Care 1980 Nov-Dec;3(6):659-662.
70
Stout RW. The role of insulin
in atherosclerosis in diabetics and nondiabetics: a review.
Diabetes 1981;30(Suppl 2):54-57.
71
Stout RW. Hyperinsulinemia and
atherosclerosis. Diabetes 1996
Jul;45 Suppl 3():S45-46.
72
Suzuki M, Ikebuchi M, et al. Mechanism
and clinical implication of insulin resistance syndrome.
Diabetes 1996 Jul;45 Suppl 3():S52-54.
73
Armstrong B, Doll R. Environmental
factors and cancer incidence and mortality in different countries, with
special reference to dietary practices.
Int J Cancer 1975 Apr 15;15(4):617-631.
74
Rydning A, Berstad A. Dietary
aspects of peptic ulcer disease. Scand
J Gastroenterol Suppl 1985;110():29-33.
75
Burkitt D. Nutrition Today 1976
Jan/Feb p. 6-13.
76
Beebe CA, Van Cauter E, et al. Effect
of temporal distribution of calories on diurnal patterns of glucose levels
and insulin secretion in NIDDM. Diabetes
Care 1990 Jul;13(7):748-755.
77
Colaco CA, Roser BJ. Atherosclerosis
and glycation. Bioessays 1994
Feb;16(2):145-147.
78
Rossignol AM, Bonnlander H. Prevalence
and severity of the premenstrual syndrome.
Effects of foods and beverages that are sweet or high in sugar
content. J Reprod Med 1991
Feb;36(2):131-136.
79
Prinz RJ, Riddle DB. Associations
between nutrition and behavior in 5-year-old children.
Nutr Rev 1986 May;44 Suppl():151-158.
80
Vaisman N, Voet H, et al. Effect
of breakfast timing on the cognitive functions of elementary school
students. Arch Pediatr Adolesc
Med 1996 Oct;150(10):1089-1092.
81
Haber GB, Heaton KW, et al. Depletion
and disruption of dietary fibre. Effects on satiety, plasma-glucose, and
serum-insulin. Lancet 1977 Oct
1;2(8040):679-682.
82
Sprietsma JE, Schuitemaker GE. Diabetes
can be prevented by reducing insulin production. Med Hypotheses 1994 Jan; 42(1):15-23.
83
Jovanovic-Peterson L, Peterson CM. Vitamin and mineral deficiencies which
may predispose to glucose intolerance of pregnancy. J Am Coll Nutr 1996 Feb;15(1):14-20.
84
Kijak E, Foust G, Steinman RR. Relationship
of blood sugar level and leukocytic phagocytosis.
Southern California Dental Assoc 1964;32(9):349-351.
85
Pennington JA. Supplementary Tables: Sugars.
In: Bowes and Church’s Food Values of Portions Commonly Used,
Fifteenth Edition. Philadelphia,
PA: JB Lippincott Company, 1989 p. 269-277.
86
Pennington JA. Supplementary Tables: Sugars.
In: Bowes and Church’s Food Values of Portions Commonly Used,
Fifteenth Edition. Philadelphia,
PA: JB Lippincott Company, 1989 p. 269-277.
87
Sanchez A, Reeser JL, et al. Role
of sugars in human neutrophilic phagocytosis.
Am J Clin Nutr 1973 Nov;26(11):1180-1184.
88
Armstrong B, Doll R. Environmental
factors and cancer incidence and mortality in different countries, with
special reference to dietary practices.
Int J Cancer 1975 Apr 15;15(4):617-631.
89
White EG. Christian Temperance.
In: Testimonies for the Church, Volume 2.
Nampa, ID: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1868-1871, p. 370.
90
Putnam JJ, Allshouse JE. Food
Consumption, Prices, and Expenditures, 1996.
Statistical Bulletin No. 928, US Department of Agriculture, p. 20.
91
Putnam JJ, Allshouse JE. Food
Consumption, Prices, and Expenditures, 1996.
Statistical Bulletin No. 928, US Department of Agriculture, p. 28.
92
Putnam JJ, Allshouse JE. Food
Consumption, Prices, and Expenditures, 1996.
Statistical Bulletin No. 928, US Department of Agriculture, p. 21.
93
Putnam JJ, Allshouse JE. Food
Consumption, Prices, and Expenditures, 1996.
Statistical Bulletin No. 928, US Department of Agriculture, p. 28.
94
Putnam JJ, Allshouse JE. Food
Consumption, Prices, and Expenditures, 1996.
Statistical Bulletin No. 928, US Department of Agriculture, p. 27.
95
Putnam JJ, Allshouse JE. Food
Consumption, Prices, and Expenditures, 1996.
Statistical Bulletin No. 928, US Department of Agriculture, p. 21.
96
The Food Processor for Windows: Nutrition Analysis & Fitness Software
[computer program]. ESHA Research. Salem,
Oregon.
97
Putnam JJ, Allshouse JE. Food
Consumption, Prices, and Expenditures, 1996.
Statistical Bulletin No. 928, US Department of Agriculture, p. 28-29.
98 Pennington JA. Carbonated Beverages.
In: Bowes and Church’s Food Values of Portions Commonly Used,
Fifteenth Edition. Philadelphia,
PA: JB Lippincott Company, 1989 p. 5-7..
99
Campbell LV, Marmot PE, et al. The
high-monounsaturated fat diet as a practical alternative for NIDDM.
Diabetes Care 1994 Mar;17(3):177-182.
100
The Food Processor for Windows: Nutrition Analysis & Fitness Software
[computer program]. ESHA Research. Salem,
Oregon.
101
Weir GC Leahy JL. Pathogenesis
of Non-insulin-dependent (Type II) diabetes mellitus. In: Kahn CR, Weir GC,
et al, editors. Joslin’s
Diabetes Mellitus—13th edition. Malvern,
PA: Lea & Febiger 1994 p. 85-86.
102
Katzel LI, Bleecker ER, et al. Effects
of weight loss vs aerobic exercise training on risk factors for coronary
disease in healthy, obese, middle-aged and older men. A randomized
controlled trial. JAMA 1995 Dec
27;274(24):1915-1921.
103
The Food Processor for Windows: Nutrition Analysis & Fitness Software
[computer program]. ESHA Research. Salem,
Oregon.
104
Stellman SD, Garfinkel L. Patterns
of artificial sweetener use and weight change in an American Cancer Society
prospective study. Appetite
1988;11 Suppl 1():85-91.
105
Tordoff MG, Alleva AM. Effect
of drinking soda sweetened with aspartame or high-fructose corn syrup on
food intake and body weight. Am
J Clin Nutr 1990 Jun;51(6):963-969.
106
Jacobson M, Liebman B, et al, editors.
Nutrition Action Health Letter.
Washington, DC: Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI),
June 1995 p. 9. (800) 237-4874.
|