[AntiMediocrity]

I've been eating Basmati Rice and no other variety ever since I learned it's the healthier of them. Is it expensive in the US? I can't see any other reason why people would eat white, it's also quite bland tasting.

[stugatz]

(03-11-2017 04:16 PM)AntiMediocrity Wrote:  

I've been eating Basmati Rice and no other variety ever since I learned it's the healthier of them. Is it expensive in the US? I can't see any other reason why people would eat white, it's also quite bland tasting.

It all depends on where you get your groceries. I've seen pretty cheap basmati rice go at the small ethnic grocers, but I'm not sure how common that is.

Grocery stores are strange in the US, you have price tiers. Cheapest is stuff like Aldi and Wal-Mart (or Sam's Club, where you buy huge quantities of stuff at a wholesale rate). Then you've got your mid-level stuff like Piggly Wiggly or Food Lion or Stop and Shop or Kroger. Above that is high-priced supermarkets like Whole Foods for the granolaheads and yuppies who have too much money to spend for their own good - although it's great if you want to hit on chicks in yoga pants.

Not too sure about the price level of stuff like farmer's markets - never been to one. Getting your food at a convenience store like Walgreens or CVS would be spending too much money.

[rudebwoy]

(03-11-2017 09:12 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

In China I eat white rice every single day. Everyone here does as well.

Why are they not fat like Americans?

Like Rudebwoy said, I know people that drink coke and sugary drinks every day and they are fat.

Care to explain why your study says our own observations are wrong?

Exactly Kai.

You can add a billion plus Indians to the equation.

Why are they not fat like Americans?

No one drinks more pop drinks than the Americans.

Why do they put pop machines in schools in America?

This comes directly from the American Diabetes Assocation.

"One 12-ounce can of regular soda has about 150 calories and 40 grams of carbohydrate. This is the same amount of carbohydrate in 10 teaspoons of sugar"

Don't know about you but I would rather eat a bowl of white rice over 10 teaspoons of sugar.

A guy I train loves soda drinks, he is also became diabetic because of it.

[PhDre]

(03-11-2017 12:06 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  

So much bro science.

(03-11-2017 10:55 AM)PhDre Wrote:  

I would not alter my eating habits based on this study alone - or any single study for that matter.

This isn't a lone study. Just in this thread I gave almost ten others.

(03-11-2017 10:55 AM)PhDre Wrote:  

First of all you don't eat the rice in isolation, but accompanied by fat, protein,... which slows down the sugar absorption.

No, it doesn't. Go read Gary Taubes.
In presence of sugar in the blood, pancreas secretes insulin, which converts it to triglycerides for storage. Otherwise blood will turn acidic and you will sustain kidney damage. Insulin also locks fat cells so no fat gets out--blood sugar must be used for fuel first. Body doesn't want to convert fat into fuel when there is sugar as fuel.
Meanwhile, fat is processed in the liver, and because there is sugar in the blood it is not used for fuel but goes straight into storage.
This is why confectionery is so bad for you. Donuts and cakes will make you fat like nothing else.

(03-11-2017 10:55 AM)PhDre Wrote:  

Secondly, name any single food group and you can find both advocates and opponents.
Sugar, fruit, carbs, gluten-containing grains, refined grains, unrefined grains, grains in general, salt, saturated fat, poly-unsaturated fat, dairy, meat, fatty fish, beans, nuts and seeds, nightshades, cruciferous vegetables, drinking lots of water,... The list is endless. And every point of view has some scientific studies to back up its arguments.

This is mostly based on marxist lies, politics, and mental disease. Most of these studies are being disproven now. The original 1970 Ancel Keys seven country study on which 1972 Congressional Dietary guidelines are based is a flagrant lie. The older studies that show exactly the opposite, still stand. Starting with Brillat-Savarin and Banting all the way to Atkins, Taubes, Attia, Phiney, Volek, Lustig and others.
Then you have vegans who are mental cases who equate humans with animals. Then you have feminists who think it is wrong to eat meat because men do.
Some of these problems are not problems on their own. Salt for example--on low carb there is no problem whatsoever. But it will raise blood pressure on high carb diets.

(03-11-2017 10:55 AM)PhDre Wrote:  

There are only a handful of foods that appear to be universally harmful:
- hydrogenated oils and [expeller and hexane extracted high poly-unsaturated fat content] vegetable oils [there, fixed.]
- high fructose corn syrup
- unfermented soy
- flavor enhancers, preservatives and other additives
Unsurprisingly, this is the bulk of the ingredient list of most processed food.

As for every other thing out there, try it for yourself. Your body is far better at telling you what it likes than a single, possibly incomplete, erroneous or biased study. Add or eliminate a food group for a couple of weeks and look for these signs:
- Do you sleep better or worse?
- Is your digestion better (no gas, no bloating, smooth solid dark brown stools, no foul smell, easy wiping) or worse?
- Is your body temperature higher? And does it rise over the course of a meal?
- If you lower your calories, do you drop mainly bodyfat? Or does your body temperature/energy/sleep quality/muscle mass drop while your fat mass stays relatively constant?
- If you raise your calories, do you gain energy/sleep quality/body temperature/muscle mass together with fat or do you simply get fatter without anything else?

My shit doesn't stink, measure temperature before/after meal, own DEXA scan. Got it. And nothing else affects any of this either.

Where is the bro science in my post?
I simply stated that you can find advocates and opponents for every single item of food - and that each of these groups can cherry pick studies to support their stance.
Yes some of these studies (like the ones blaming saturated fat for heart disease) are clearly complete bogus - but saying that these studies exist, and are used to steer public policy, is quite an objective statement in my eyes.

You are clearly well read in this subject.
What makes the research of Gary Taubes and others who see sugar as the root of most diseases so believable?

Some researchers reject this notion. On the contrary, they think that:
1) repeated glucose/insulin spikes do not cause insulin resistance. More likely causes include pufa's, chronic stress and inflammation,...
2) a low carb/low sugar diet leads to excessive production of adrenalin and cortisol to keep blood glucose levels sufficiently elevated. Over time this leads to chronic stress, inflammation and lowered metabolism.

I've got no idea who is "right". What do you think about this divide?

I fully believe you when you say that you do great on a low carb/low sugar diet. You know about before/after meal temperature measurements so it is clear that the diet is working for you and that you aren't on a temporary adrenalin high.

But I will use myself as a counterexample.
For years I ate a diet that you would probably approve of: meat, nuts and seeds, olive oil, coconut oil, eggs, beans, raw vegetables, quinoa and drinking lots of water were the cornerstones of my diet. But my health kept on deteriorating without a clear cause.
Finally, I found out that my body hates nuts, seeds, beans, raw cruciferous vegetables, unrefined grains and thrives on large amounts of fruit and raw dairy.
(A big thank you goes to n/a who kept on convincing me to look for lifestyle causes and fixes instead of focusing on exotic diseases and genetic defects!)

So I see two completely conflicting lines of research, and two completely conflicting real life examples.

Therefore, I think that the only advice that we can reasonably give to someone else is:
1) avoid processed foods
2) find out which natural foods work for you

[Idries]

PhDre - how did you find out what was good/bad for you ? Elimination diet ?

[rudebwoy]

PhDre - what about the meat?

[Vill@in]

I stick to brown rice for my rice needs.

And goddamn does that stuff clean my guts out.

[TravelerKai]

I ate brown rice for years as a substitue. My family wanted to continue eating Jambalaya and Ettoufee without white rice effects.

Long story short, it makes my GERD or acid reflux go insane. I no longer eat it.

Another thing is that Louisiana people boil rice in water in a pot. Chinese steam it in rice cookers. I have no idea what that really does health wise either.

Also to address the OP's reply:

I know about China's growing diabetes numbers. My wife and I were talking about that last week.

But guess what.

Some younger ones are drinking cokes, juice, coffee, and eating sweets nowadays. Starbucks is everywhere. They also have all this shitty milk tea stuff everywhere and some of it is loaded with sugar. If you go to Chinatowns in the USA, there are 7-10 milk tea places within a block of each other. Depending on where in China it can be just as bad.

Went to a Starbucks in Guangzhou. Went inside. Saw 4 fat girls. Before I walked in, I saw maybe 1 walking around a few hours back, and Guangzhou is known for thick Chinese.

Heavy caffeine use hurts your adrenal glands. That raises cortisol and lowers your metabolism. Chinese (especially older ones) take Ginseng and Lingzhi to heal them in their herbal teas and medicine for hundreds of years (not because they drink caffeine but just for good health). Younger Chinese never bother with certain old Chinese medicine until they get older.

Americans don't heal their glands either. Very few know about DIM, Ganoderma, Zinc, etc. to slow the damage down. Coffee and sugar drinks are at an all time high. Like Rudebwoy said, these drinks are literally a bowl of refined white cane sugar that a person has just ingested. That stuff is pure poison and rots out your teeth.

I see farmer people out in China with what looks like at first bad teeth. If I keep looking at the teeth, they are not rotted out, just discolored. If they have bad breath it is from their stomachs, not their teeth, due to certain foods they eat.

This reminds me of the thread a dentist and Scorpion were talking about how hunter and gatherers did not have cavities because they were not eating sugar. Just meat and vegetables. Now people been eating rice for thousands of years, yet right now, it causes diabetes?

I think you need to take entire diets into account more.

Also, weight and diabetes are very much related. You can technically reverse diabetes by losing weight and eating healthier. You can also avoid it with yearly blood work and lifestyle changes.

OP, I'm not a biologist or a medical dude. If I am wrong show me. I will keep an open mind because like I said, I know martial arts/MMA training, video games, gaming women a little bit, history, and politics. That's it. I never stopped any of my fighters from eating that or pasta, and we always saw benefits of it when we needed it.

Thanks for the responses in advance.

[FretDancer]

Quote:

They also have all this shitty milk tea stuff everywhere and some of it is loaded with sugar. If you go to Chinatowns in the USA, there are 7-10 milk tea places within a block of each other. Depending on where in China it can be just as bad.

I think you can blame Taiwan for that.

Back to topic, I think when it comes to Diabetes, the number 1 thing we can put the blame on is sugar. Here is a good article I was reading just now:

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articl...ption.aspx

[ivansirko]

Recently this also came out:

https://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/Consume...352569.htm

"FDA Explores Impact of Arsenic in Rice"

What is it with all of the bad news about rice?

[ElFlaco]

(03-16-2017 09:40 PM)FretDancer Wrote:  

Back to topic, I think when it comes to Diabetes, the number 1 thing we can put the blame on is sugar. Here is a good article I was reading just now:

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articl...ption.aspx

Here's the video at the link you posted. The speaker is Gary Taubes, who came on the scene a few years ago with his massively-research book Good Calories, Bad Calories making the case that carbohydrates, not calories/exercise, is at the root of the obesity epidemic.

Related RVF Thread: 4 Years on the LCHF Diet - Datasheet

[PhDre]

(03-12-2017 03:49 PM)Idries Wrote:  

PhDre - how did you find out what was good/bad for you ? Elimination diet ?

Yes indeed.

(03-12-2017 08:32 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  

PhDre - what about the meat?

I've got no problems with meat. The cornerstones of my current diet are red meat, raw dairy, eggs, coconut oil, fruit, non-cruciferous vegetables and potatoes.

Here you can find researcher Stephan Guyenet's opinion on carbs/sugar and obesity: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.be/201...esity.html

I found this comment on the article particularly interesting:

Quote:

Good writeup that overall jives well with my "evolving perspective" on the issue.

My impression is that Taubes has been (somewhat inconsistently) backtracking on the carbohydrate hypothesis (as expressed in GCBC), mostly because of the implicit critique from Lustig.

Overall, it would be strange if one of the three major macronutrients available for human nutrition would induce metabolic derangement in itself. The notion is strangely similar to that animal fats cause heart disease...

Some related thoughts, all mixed up:

- IIRC, USDA data from before WWII should be taken with a scoop of salt or so, but that´s a minor issue. (We can observe a lack of metabolic derangement in present-day high-carbohydrate populations).

- I don´t find it strange that low-carb approaches are effective in treating obesity. If the core problem is one of leptin resistance (as seems likely to me), brought on (probably in most cases) by hyperinsulenemia, reducing insulin release seems like a workable approach for those unable to get a prescription for octreotide.

- If we take Lustig at his word, Insulin brings on satiety because it is closely coupled with leptin, IIRC. It is only when leptin resistance is induced by chronic hyperinsulenemia that insulin release becomes both larger and problematic.

I found, for instance, Lustig’s insulin response – weight reduction chart (from his AHS seminar) pretty convincing on this score.

- Quick comment: “If anything, obesity is a condition of "internal excess". I don´t think it´s reasonable to claim that obese people are *actually* starving. However, it seems like a pretty good term for describing leptin resistance. Your body might not be starving, but it thinks that it is.

- So, what agents cause the problem? My personal candidate list:

- Fructose in larger amounts.

- PUFA.

- Industrial Trans fats. (PUFA:a and trans fats are what constitute that fat increase during the obesity epidemic that you note above)

All pretty new at present concentrations in the diet, and all have increased in consumption along with the obesity and diabetes epidemics. There are also credible mechanisms in place to explain why they could cause hyperinsulinemia.

Given the available research and my personal experience, I am not convinced that carbs/sugar cause insulin resistance/obesity/diabetes and that a low carb diet is healthy and sustainable for everyone.

However, I must agree that a low carb diet seems to be the most effective way to lose excess bodyfat.

[Teutatis]

(03-11-2017 12:06 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  

So much bro science.

You're the one peddling bro science with your bs studies.

White rice is great, eat it, it's not going to make you diabetic. White rice is even superior to brown rice because it tastes way better, it's digested easier, it cooks faster and nutritionally it's about the same.

[Teutatis]

(03-09-2017 12:43 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  

Fruit is certainly better than juice because it has mitigating effect of the fiber.
But consider the following:

Here's what your food would look like if it weren't genetically modified over millennia

We have much to thank human ingenuinity that created nutritionally rich and good tasting fruits and vegetables instead of us having to rely on those sad things nature gave us.

[SamuelBRoberts]

When I'm in Tokyo I am surrounded by people who eat Rice, rice, rice. They buy it in giant bags. Like 20 pounds of the shit. They have special rice-making devices, which use incredibly advanced technology to make sure that they will have top-quality rice available whenever they want it. They consume more rice in a day than most Americans do in a month.

None of these people are fat, and none of them show any signs of diabetes.

I am skeptical.

[skptc]

(03-17-2017 10:07 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

When I'm in Tokyo I am surrounded by people who eat Rice, rice, rice. They buy it in giant bags. Like 20 pounds of the shit. They have special rice-making devices, which use incredibly advanced technology to make sure that they will have top-quality rice available whenever they want it. They consume more rice in a day than most Americans do in a month.

None of these people are fat, and none of them show any signs of diabetes.

I am skeptical.

What are the signs of diabetes?

[captain_shane]

(03-17-2017 10:16 PM)skptc Wrote:  

(03-17-2017 10:07 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

When I'm in Tokyo I am surrounded by people who eat Rice, rice, rice. They buy it in giant bags. Like 20 pounds of the shit. They have special rice-making devices, which use incredibly advanced technology to make sure that they will have top-quality rice available whenever they want it. They consume more rice in a day than most Americans do in a month.

None of these people are fat, and none of them show any signs of diabetes.

I am skeptical.

What are the signs of diabetes?

Missing feet.

[Mr. Scumbag]

Asians generally eat low calorie meals, so they don't gain weight and get fat (even though a lot of them are skinnyfat underneath their clothing). But the amount of carbohydrates they consume probably takes its toll on their health later on in life.

I've also read that Asians can process carbohydrates better than people of European/Caucasian descent can.

[Belgrano]

This thread made me think of this news article I read recently:

Tsimane people: Indigenous Bolivian group have 'world's healthiest arteries', study finds

Quote:

Amazonian group leads a highly active way of life based on hunting, foraging and fishing

An indigenous group living in the Amazon rainforest have the healthiest arteries of any population ever studied, it has been discovered.
It’s often warned that unhealthy, sedentary lifestyles common in many countries can lead to clogged-up arteries, increasing the risk of heart disease.
Now scientists are looking to the habits of the Tsimane people in Bolivia, who lead a highly active way of life based on hunting, foraging and fishing, for clues on how other populations can improve their heart health.

People from the Tsimane (pronounced chee-mah-nay) community are five times less likely to develop a condition known as coronary atherosclerosis, or hardening of the arteries, than people in the US, according to a new study.
The research, published in The Lancet, found the arteries of an 80-year-old member of the Tsimane people resembled that of an American in their mid-50s.

“Our study shows that the Tsimane indigenous South Americans have the lowest prevalence of coronary atherosclerosis of any population yet studied,” said Hillard Kaplan, the study’s senior anthropology author from the University of New Mexico.
“Their lifestyle suggests that a diet low in saturated fats and high in non-processed fibre-rich carbohydrates, along with wild game and fish, not smoking and being active throughout the day could help prevent hardening in the arteries of the heart.”

More than 700 people aged over 40 from the Tsimane population were involved in the study, which was funded by the US National Institute on Aging and National Institutes of Health.
Almost nine out of 10 of them were found to have clear arteries, indicating no risk of heart disease.

The Tsimane diet largely consists of rice, plantain, cassava root, corn, nuts and fruits, with protein, mostly from animal meat, accounting for 14 per cent of their diet, and fat accounting for the same proportion.

It is estimated that members of the group are inactive for only 10 per cent of the day, unlike many people in industrialised societies who are often sedentary for more than half their waking hours.

Commenting on the study, Sir Nilesh Samani, medical director at the British Heart Foundation, said lessons could be learned from the Tsimane’s way of life to reduce the risk of heart disease.

“It may not be possible for people in the industrialised world to copy the Tsimane community’s way of life, but there are certainly aspects of their diet and lifestyle, such as not smoking and eating a diet low in fat, that we can better incorporate into our lives to help reduce our risk of heart disease,” he said.

Tim Chico, consultant cardiologist and reader in cardiovascular medicine at the University of Sheffield, said it was important “not to romanticise the Tsimane existence”.
“Two thirds of them suffer intestinal worms and they have a very hard life, without fresh water, sewerage or electricity,” he said.
Rates of diseases other than heart disease were much higher in the Tsimane than in the West, particularly for infections like tuberculosis, added Dr Chico.

The researchers visited 85 Tsimane villages between 2004 and 2015 and measured heart disease risk by carrying out x-ray scans on 705 adults aged 40 to 94.
Similar scans of nearly 7,000 Americans in a previous study showed that only 14 per cent had no risk of heart disease, with half at moderate-to-high risk – a five-fold greater prevalence rate than that seen in the Tsimane population.

Coronary atherosclerosis, the gradual hardening and ‘furring up’ of the arteries, can have serious consequences including heart attacks and strokes.
It has no symptoms at first, but can be prevented through a healthy lifestyle.

Around 10,000 Tsimane people live in small communities along the Maniqui River. Tsimane men spend an average of six to seven hours a day engaged in physical activity, said the researchers, while women are active for four to six hours.

Seems like carbs don't kill.

Interesting comment from the linked article:

Quote:

This is a quote from the paper that supplied the dietary information about the Tsimane:
"our behavioural observations of foods eaten did not account for organ meat consumption or the addition of cooking fat, which may substantially increase saturated fat intake."
"Tsimane women generally cook with rendered animal fat, and rarely purchase or use vegetable oils. "
That paper was a study of breast milk and found low levels of LA (vegetable polyunsaturated fat) and high levels of DHA (from fish and meat) in Tsimane milk.
This is consistent with the theory that the ratio between omega 3 and omega 6 in the diet is an important factor in cardiovascular health, and that vegetable oils are harmful.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3851016/

From another article:

Quote:

Their lives are spent on hunts that can last for over eight hours covering 18km for wild deer, monkeys or tapir and clearing large areas of primal forest with an axe, as well as the gentler pastime of gathering berries.
(...)
In the Tsimané population, heart rate, blood pressure, cholesterol, and blood glucose were also low. The study suggests that genetic risk is less important than lifestyle. “Over the last five years, new roads and the introduction of motorised canoes have dramatically increased access to the nearby market town to buy sugar and cooking oil,” said Dr Ben Trumble, of Arizona State University, US. “This is ushering in major economic and nutritional changes for the Tsimané people.” Those whose lifestyle is changing have higher cholesterol levels than others who stick to hunting and fishing.
(...)
Tsimané people are more likely to get infections than those in the US, but even so, he said, “they have a very high likelihood of living into old age.”
The researchers cannot yet say whether diet or the active lifestyle is the more important component, said Kaplan, but they want to go on to investigate that by following those of the community whose lifestyles change with exposure to the town. “My best guess is that they act and they interact,” he said.

I'd say:

1.) No processed foods
2.) Balanced diet
3.) Regular exercise (so important!)

looks like a good strategy. Not exactly news.

[MOVSM]

(03-16-2017 03:37 PM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

I ate brown rice for years as a substitue. My family wanted to continue eating Jambalaya and Ettoufee without white rice effects.

Long story short, it makes my GERD or acid reflux go insane. I no longer eat it.

Another thing is that Louisiana people boil rice in water in a pot. Chinese steam it in rice cookers. I have no idea what that really does health wise either.

Also to address the OP's reply:

I know about China's growing diabetes numbers. My wife and I were talking about that last week.

But guess what.

Some younger ones are drinking cokes, juice, coffee, and eating sweets nowadays. Starbucks is everywhere. They also have all this shitty milk tea stuff everywhere and some of it is loaded with sugar. If you go to Chinatowns in the USA, there are 7-10 milk tea places within a block of each other. Depending on where in China it can be just as bad.

Went to a Starbucks in Guangzhou. Went inside. Saw 4 fat girls. Before I walked in, I saw maybe 1 walking around a few hours back, and Guangzhou is known for thick Chinese.

Heavy caffeine use hurts your adrenal glands. That raises cortisol and lowers your metabolism. Chinese (especially older ones) take Ginseng and Lingzhi to heal them in their herbal teas and medicine for hundreds of years (not because they drink caffeine but just for good health). Younger Chinese never bother with certain old Chinese medicine until they get older.

Americans don't heal their glands either. Very few know about DIM, Ganoderma, Zinc, etc. to slow the damage down. Coffee and sugar drinks are at an all time high. Like Rudebwoy said, these drinks are literally a bowl of refined white cane sugar that a person has just ingested. That stuff is pure poison and rots out your teeth.

I see farmer people out in China with what looks like at first bad teeth. If I keep looking at the teeth, they are not rotted out, just discolored. If they have bad breath it is from their stomachs, not their teeth, due to certain foods they eat.

This reminds me of the thread a dentist and Scorpion were talking about how hunter and gatherers did not have cavities because they were not eating sugar. Just meat and vegetables. Now people been eating rice for thousands of years, yet right now, it causes diabetes?

I think you need to take entire diets into account more.

Also, weight and diabetes are very much related. You can technically reverse diabetes by losing weight and eating healthier. You can also avoid it with yearly blood work and lifestyle changes.

OP, I'm not a biologist or a medical dude. If I am wrong show me. I will keep an open mind because like I said, I know martial arts/MMA training, video games, gaming women a little bit, history, and politics. That's it. I never stopped any of my fighters from eating that or pasta, and we always saw benefits of it when we needed it.

Thanks for the responses in advance.

TravelerKai, the rice that people ate for centuries was not refined rice. Refined rice appeared with advent of Industrial revolution. It is what fucks us up. Once you remove the bran and the germ from the grain, all health effects of it are gone.

Sugar is indeed bad stuff, but so are the refined grains.

I feel like I'm repeating the same thing for 5th time in a row...

[MOVSM]

(03-17-2017 10:25 PM)captain_shane Wrote:  

(03-17-2017 10:16 PM)skptc Wrote:  

(03-17-2017 10:07 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

When I'm in Tokyo I am surrounded by people who eat Rice, rice, rice. They buy it in giant bags. Like 20 pounds of the shit. They have special rice-making devices, which use incredibly advanced technology to make sure that they will have top-quality rice available whenever they want it. They consume more rice in a day than most Americans do in a month.

None of these people are fat, and none of them show any signs of diabetes.

I am skeptical.

What are the signs of diabetes?

Missing feet.

Non-obese patients with type 2 diabetes and prediabetic subjects: distinct phenotypes requiring special diabetes treatment and (or) prevention?

Quote:

A major reason for the increased incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) across the world is the so-called obesity epidemic, which occurs both in developed and developing countries. However, a large proportion of patients with T2DM in European and, in particular, Asian countries are non-obese. The non-obese T2DM phenotype is characterized by disproportionally reduced insulin secretion and less insulin resistance, as compared with obese patients with T2DM. Importantly, non-obese patients with T2DM have a similar increased risk of cardiovascular disease as obese T2DM patients. The risk of T2DM in non-obese patients is influenced by genetics as well as factors operating in utero indicated by low birth weight. Furthermore, this phenotype is slightly more prevalent among patients with latent autoimmune diabetes in adults, characterized by positive anti-GAD antibodies. The recently identified TCF7L2 gene polymorphism resulting in low insulin secretion influences the risk of T2DM in both obese and non-obese subjects, but is relatively more prevalent among non-obese patients with T2DM. Furthermore, the Pro12Ala polymorphism of the PPAR gamma gene influencing insulin action increases the risk of T2DM in non-obese subjects. Despite a "normal" body mass index, non-obese patients with T2DM are generally characterized by a higher degree of both abdominal and total fat masses (adiposity). Prevention of T2DM with lifestyle intervention is at least as effective in non-obese as in obese prediabetic subjects, and recent data suggest that metformin treatment targeting insulin resistance and non-glycemic cardiovascular disease risk factors is as beneficial in non-obese as in obese patients with T2DM. Nevertheless, non-obese patients with T2DM may progress to insulin treatment more rapidly as compared with obese patients with T2DM.

[rudebwoy]

(03-19-2017 10:01 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  

I feel like I'm repeating the same thing for 5th time in a row...

Maybe it is time to keep quiet.

No one is buying what you are selling.

[MOVSM]

(03-20-2017 11:18 AM)rudebwoy Wrote:  

(03-19-2017 10:01 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  

I feel like I'm repeating the same thing for 5th time in a row...

Maybe it is time to keep quiet.

No one is buying what you are selling.

and maybe y9ou should read the ~10 diff studies I posted in the course of this thread that support my original post

[realologist]

New study confirms that drinking water has a 100% mortality rate

Bumfuck University has just came out with a rare new study confirming a previously long-held belief by soda and beer companies that if you drink water you will DIE.

The ground-breaking study was headed by German Scientist "Hired gun 3" and confirmed those suspicions. The following is a statement from "Hired gun 3", "We discovered that ingesting the substance h2O on a long enough time line has a 100% mortality rate. Our sample size is as large as human history."

He recommends you quit drinking water now and replace it with beer and soda and sign up for life insurance. This will just extend your life as your impending soon is coming.

[brick tamland]

It's been said that science is a religion.
these numerous and frequent studies seem to keep us away from vital knowledge, regardless of the PhDs held by these agents of Big Food and Big Pharma.
To try to advance the thread, for which I'm grateful as I've cut out white rice now, I'd point to a harmful substance in sweeteners and"diet" carbonated drinks. ASPARTAME.

Quote:

Aspartame is the technical name for the brand names NutraSweet, Equal, Spoonful, and Equal-Measure.

Quote:

The artificial sweeteners are hundreds of time sweeter than sugar: Equal, which contains aspartame, is 160 to 200 times sweeter than sugar.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sweeter-than...3-08-2004/

FDA approved nonetheless. If you still believe big government cares about you, instead of sending you into the hands of big pharma and the private hospital groups for lifelong chronic treatment, do some research