 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Diabetes / October 2003Latest Endo. visit
Saw my Endo. today and he was pleased. Most of my numbers were good. Thyroid is in range again and A1c is 6.1. Was 6.3 last time. Cholesterol is doing wacky things again though. This time the total cholesterol was 173 (normal <200), HDL was 36 (normal >/= 40), LDL was 68 (normal <130), Cholesterol/HDL ratio 4.8 (normal <4.4) and Triglycerides were 346. Eek! Don't know what it's going to take to get that down. But the best news is that I have lost 12 pounds! Looks like that hop ball is working for me. Or was. Got to wait for the knee to heal more before I try hopping again.  SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >Saw my Endo. today and he was pleased. Most of my numbers were good. >Thyroid is in range again and A1c is 6.1. Was 6.3 last time. Cholesterol [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >is working for me. Or was. Got to wait for the knee to heal more before I >try hopping again. Glad to hear most of your numbers are doing better.. What is a hop ball? As always YMMV and this is JMO Jeanne Type 2 Diagnosed 05/28/02 189/154/120 > Glad to hear most of your numbers are doing better.. What is a hop ball? It's a big round ball with a handle on top. You sit on it and use the handle to sort of pull yourself up while hopping with your legs. I thought it would give the legs a workout, but it seemed to be doing wonders for my upper body in no time at all. I did more research and found out that indeed it is for upper body. You are essentially pulling up your own weight each time you hop. And now that I think about it, when my Mom tried mine, she said it hurt her knees. That particular day, I also noticed that my knees were hurting when I used it and this hadn't happened before. So I guess the next time I feel some knee pain I had better take it seriously and increase my leg exercises. Then maybe I won't be hobbling. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ Hopball = spacehopper > > Glad to hear most of your numbers are doing better.. What is a hop ball? > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > next time I feel some knee pain I had better take it seriously and increase > my leg exercises. Then maybe I won't be hobbling. Is the hop ball kind of like the old toy? I seem to remember a toy that I sat on, held on to some sort of head (maybe a cow or dragon?) and raced my brothers. I may have to go look for it at a sporting store! Steph > > Glad to hear most of your numbers are doing better.. What is a hop ball? > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > next time I feel some knee pain I had better take it seriously and increase > my leg exercises. Then maybe I won't be hobbling. > Is the hop ball kind of like the old toy? I seem to remember a toy that I > sat on, held on to some sort of head (maybe a cow or dragon?) and raced my > brothers. > I may have to go look for it at a sporting store! Yep. The same! SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >t's a big round ball with a handle on top. You sit on it and use the >handle to sort of pull yourself up while hopping with your legs. I thought [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >next time I feel some knee pain I had better take it seriously and increase >my leg exercises. Then maybe I won't be hobbling. Thanks.. It sounds like the Big ball my kids used to play with at my hubbys grandmas house.. The kids loved it.. How about swimming? Do you have access to a pool.. The pool is what helped me.. I was diagnosed aprox a year or so after foot surgery and was still having problems walking.. Found out later from Dr, use the treadmill, dont walk on the road..The treadmill gives and has less of an impact on your foot and knees.. Also an eliptical trainer is good as you are not picking your foot off the ground and then striking it down again.. Good Luck.. As always YMMV and this is JMO Jeanne Type 2 Diagnosed 05/28/02 189/154/120 > Thanks.. It sounds like the Big ball my kids used to play with at my hubbys > grandmas house.. The kids loved it.. How about swimming? Do you have access to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > not picking your foot off the ground and then striking it down again.. Good > Luck.. Can't swim because of the vein problem. If I have the compression hose off for very long, my legs and feet get swollen and painful. Unless I'm lying down with feet elevated that is. Plus, I HATE swimming! Can't do the treadmill either. I always go shooting off the end of it. Not sure about the elliptical trainer. Will have to look into that. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >Can't swim because of the vein problem. If I have the compression hose off >for very long, my legs and feet get swollen and painful. Unless I'm lying >down with feet elevated that is. Plus, I HATE swimming! Can't do the >treadmill either. I always go shooting off the end of it. Not sure about >the elliptical trainer. Will have to look into that. Good Luck.. Sorry about the swimming. I hope you are able to find something that works for you.. As always YMMV and this is JMO Jeanne Type 2 Diagnosed 05/28/02 189/154/120 > > Glad to hear most of your numbers are doing better.. What is a hop ball? > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Type 2 > http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ That thing sounds intriguing. Do they sell them at sporting goods stores or toy stores? -- Chuck -ô¿ô- ~ email: perry1940@mchsi.com All outgoing messages checked by Norton Anti-Virus > That thing sounds intriguing. Do they sell them at sporting goods stores or toy > stores? They might. I got mine online at this URL: http://www.somedayisle.com/index.htm I have since seen this particular one available at many other online sources. You can get the smaller balls at many places, but the blue one that is pictured is the only one I've seen that is sized for an adult. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >> That thing sounds intriguing. Do they sell them at sporting goods stores >or toy [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >sources. You can get the smaller balls at many places, but the blue one >that is pictured is the only one I've seen that is sized for an adult. those things are still around? Mack Type 1 since 1975 http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org http://www.insulin-pumpers.org In tribute to the United States of America and the State of Israel, two bastions of strength in a world filled with strife and terrorism. > those things are still around? They've made a comeback. I read somewhere that they were popularized again by the rock band Kiss. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >> those things are still around? > >They've made a comeback. I read somewhere that they were popularized again >by the rock band Kiss. oh, thanks! not! I needed that visual. an aging rock group wearing costumes and makeup bouncing around on large red rubber balloons.... Mack Type 1 since 1975 http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org http://www.insulin-pumpers.org In tribute to the United States of America and the State of Israel, two bastions of strength in a world filled with strife and terrorism. > oh, thanks! not! I needed that visual. an aging rock group wearing > costumes and makeup bouncing around on large red rubber balloons.... Hehehehe. Don't come to my house then! :) SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >>Saw my Endo. today and he was pleased. Most of my numbers were good. >>Thyroid is in range again and A1c is 6.1. . . .(snip). . . >> and Triglycerides were 346. Eek! >>Don't know what it's going to take to get that down. Metformin has a good reputation for knocking down triglycerides. Regards Old Al > Metformin has a good reputation for knocking down triglycerides. That might be so, but it doesn't seem to be helping me! Triglycerides have gone up since starting it. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ "Julie Bove" <jnospambove@bestweb.net> wrote in > That might be so, but it doesn't seem to be helping me! Triglycerides have > gone up since starting it. Julie, triglycerides respond well to a reduction in carbs, especially the higher GI type carbs, (white breads etc) and fat loss. I can't remember what your diet is, I seem to recall it was vegetarian? How much exercise are you able to manage? In article <bm65ta$j3r0n$1@ID-139901.news.uni-berlin.de>, Ozgirl scribbled hurriedly; +"Julie Bove" <jnospambove@bestweb.net> wrote in +> That might be so, but it doesn't seem to be helping me! Triglycerides +have +> gone up since starting it. +Julie, triglycerides respond well to a reduction in carbs, especially the +higher GI type carbs, (white breads etc) and fat loss. I can't remember what +your diet is, I seem to recall it was vegetarian? How much exercise are you +able to manage? Ahha, I knew I was on the right track. Someone else has arrived at a similar conclusion. I think I am begining to get the hang of this. Best Wishes Ds > "Julie Bove" <jnospambove@bestweb.net> wrote in > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > your diet is, I seem to recall it was vegetarian? How much exercise are you > able to manage? No longer a total vegetarian because of anemia, but most meals are still vegetarian. I don't eat white bread any more and very little in the way of processed foods. Breakfast is almost always light oatmeal bread and cottage cheese, lunch is bean dip made with no fat refried beans, a bit of cheese, 6 trans-fat free organic blue corn chips and plenty of raw veggies. Dinner is often soup or salad. I try to get at least an hour of exercise every day, but lately it has been less due to the knee injury. As for the fat loss, I don't know what else I can do there. Unfortunately, all my fat seems to be concentrated around my middle (except for the boobs, that is). Everywhere else I seem to have muscles on my muscles. I am back up to using my 18 pound dumbbells. And I have a long walk each day to and from the bus stop with my daughter. This isn't helping my leg veins much. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >Breakfast is almost always light oatmeal bread and cottage >cheese, lunch is bean dip made with no fat refried beans, a bit of cheese, 6 [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >don't know what else I can do there. Unfortunately, all my fat seems to be >concentrated around my middle (except for the boobs, that is). Your TGLs and your visceral fat are telling you that your IR has progressed and that your diet is too high in sugar/starch. That's the kind of diet that brought me IR and PCOS. My TGL dropped from 359 to 109 within two weeks of cutting starch and sugar from my diet. Susan > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > That's the kind of diet that brought me IR and PCOS. My TGL dropped from 359 > to 109 within two weeks of cutting starch and sugar from my diet. Starch and sugar? I call them carbohydrates and I don't think my diet is too high in them. If it were, then wouldn't my BG be too high too? And isn't Glucohpage a med that addresses this problem? I can't cut all carbs from my diet. That's not a healthy diet and certainly not feasible for me to do. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >Starch and sugar? I call them carbohydrates and I don't think my diet is >too high in them. They are carbohydrates, and that's about all you're eating. Sugar, in one form or another. That's what causes elevated TGLs and worsening abdominal obesity due to progressive IR. . If it were, then wouldn't my BG be too high too? And >isn't Glucohpage a med that addresses this problem? Not if you're artificially controlling it with meds. Mine was often too low when I was hyperinsulinemic. > I can't cut all carbs >from my diet. That's not a healthy diet and certainly not feasible for me >to do. What's healthy about a deadly level of TGLs and worsening insulin resistance, and the need for meds to control the damage from your diet? Susan >They are carbohydrates, and that's about all you're eating. Sugar, in one form >or another. Have you any concept of what you are talking about? >That's what causes elevated TGLs and worsening abdominal obesity due to >progressive IR. She has probs with her trigs. So what? A lot of people do. If you knew what you were talking about, you would realize that her diet is not the major contributory factor you would like it to be. >Not if you're artificially controlling it with meds. Mine was often too low >when I was hyperinsulinemic. Artificially controlling it with meds? You gave yourself away as a fringe kook with that one. No one likes to take meds. Not everyone can control everything with D&E. Artificial control? Those who control their carbs to the extreme by eating an unhealthy balance with an artificially low amount of needed nutrients, using diets such as Atkins and the rest, are the ones doing long term damage to themselves. >What's healthy about a deadly level of TGLs and worsening insulin resistance, >and the need for meds to control the damage from your diet? It is much better to use meds when needed, that to live a life of denial convincing yourself that you are somehow a superior being for not using meds, but slowly chocking the life out of yourself with faddish crackpot "diets" and probably a bunch of "organic" supplements, that are unproven, made with unknown ingredients, and have a likelihood of doing much more harm than good. Now, why don't you and your pal Roose (Mu) just wander back to low-carb, and be with the rest of your pals? We have enough extremist views here, we don't need yours. Sleepy ======== COWBOY UP! Magic Number=7 ======== >Have you any concept of what you are talking about? Yes, thanks. Have you? >She has probs with her trigs. So what? So, it's a very significant independent risk factor and marker for CVD. > A lot of people do. Right. Diabetics and cardiology patients. >If you knew >what you were talking about, you would realize that her diet is not >the major contributory factor you would like it to be. If you could even *buy* a clue, you'd know that her TGLs are a marker for excess glycemic load. >Artificially controlling it with meds? You gave yourself away as a >fringe kook with that one. Hardly. And I'm not anti meds, especially metformin, for those who can't control their metabolic problems and diabetes with proper diet and exercise. > No one likes to take meds. Not everyone can >control everything with D&E. Artificial control? Yeah, it's not risk free, certainly not compared with a proper diet. > Those who control >their carbs to the extreme by eating an unhealthy balance with an >artificially low amount of needed nutrients, using diets such as >Atkins and the rest, are the ones doing long term damage to >themselves. What's unhealthy about replacing nutrient low starches with nutrient and antioxidant dense vegetables and salads? >It is much better to use meds when needed, that to live a life of >denial convincing yourself that you are somehow a superior being for >not using meds, but slowly chocking the life out of yourself with >faddish crackpot "diets and probably a bunch of "organic" >supplements, that are unproven, made with unknown ingredients, and >have a likelihood of doing much more harm than good. If one can control TGLs and glucose with diet and exercise, then one is better off doing that than taking meds and loading up on sugar/starches. If one can't control lipids and BG without meds despite a healthy low carb eating plan, then one should take meds such as metformin, I agree. But to pop pills so you can eat foods that dramatically raise your risk of CVD isn't wise. But hey, maybe that's just me. >Now, why don't you and your pal Roose (Mu) just wander back to >low-carb, and be with the rest of your pals? We have enough extremist >views here, we don't need yours. You've leapt to a very wrong conclusion. Quite a few ignorant ones, in fact. I wish you well, despite your bad manners and lack of good sense. Susan >>They are carbohydrates, and that's about all you're eating. Sugar, in one form >>or another. > > Have you any concept of what you are talking about? Sleepy, Please do a web search on basic nutrition. Susan is correct. Jim SignatureJoin us in the Diabetic-Talk Chatroom on UnderNet /server irc.undernet.org --- /join #Diabetic-Talk More info: http://www.diabetic-talk.org/ >>>They are carbohydrates, and that's about all you're eating. Sugar, in one form >>>or another. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Jim ======== COWBOY UP! Magic Number=7 ======== >Please do a web search on basic nutrition. Susan is correct. > >Jim No need to Jim, Please read the whole thread and get back to me. Sleepy ======== COWBOY UP! Magic Number=7 ======== >No need to Jim, Please read the whole thread and get back to me. > >Sleepy Why do low-fat high-carbohydrate diets accentuate postprandial lipemia in patients with NIDDM? Chen YD, Coulston AM, Zhou MY, Hollenbeck CB, Reaven GM Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, California. OBJECTIVE--To understand why low-fat high-carbohydrate (CHO) diets lead to higher fasting and postprandial concentrations of triglyceride (TG)-rich lipoproteins in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS--Patients with NIDDM were placed randomly on diets containing either 55% CHO, 30% fat, and 15% protein or 40% CHO, 45% fat, and 15% protein for 6 weeks, followed by crossover to the other diet. Test meals at the end of each diet period were consumed at 8:00 A.M. and 12:00 P.M. (noon) and contained 20 and 40% of daily calories, respectively. Vitamin A was also given at noon, and TG-rich lipoproteins of intestinal origin were identified by the presence of vitamin A esters. Frequent measurements were made throughout the 24-h study period of plasma glucose, insulin, and TG concentrations. Plasma samples obtained from 12:00 P.M. (noon) until 12 A.M. (midnight) were subjected to ultracentrifugation, and measurements were made of TG and vitamin A ester concentrations in plasma and in both the Svedberg flotation constant (Sf) > 400 (chylomicron) and Sf 20-400 (chylomicron remnant) lipoprotein fractions. In addition, very-low-density lipoprotein (VLDL)-TG turnover rate was estimated by following the decay of [3H]VLDL-TG. Finally, postheparin lipoprotein lipase and hepatic lipase activities were measured at the end of each dietary period. RESULTS--Mean +/- SE hourly concentrations of glucose (8.0 +/- 0.8 vs. 7.5 +/- 0.7 mmol/l), insulin (184 +/- 26 vs. 158 +/- 19 pmol/l), and TG (2.8 +/- 0.2 vs. 2.1 +/- 0.2 mmol/l) were higher (P < 0.05-0.001) after the 55% CHO diet. The 55% CHO diet also led to an increase (P < 0.05-0.01) in the mean +/- SE hourly concentrations of vitamin A esters in plasma (2.3 +/- 0.3 vs. 1.6 +/- 0.1 mumol/l) and in both the chylomicron (2.0 +/- 0.3 vs. 1.4 +/- 0.1 mumol/l) and chylomicron remnant fractions (0.36 +/- 0.04 vs. 0.14 +/- 0.03 mumol/l). In addition, the VLDL-TG production rate was higher (17.2 +/- 1.4 vs. 12.8 +/- 1.0 mg.kg-1.h-1, P < 0.003) and the VLDL-TG fractional catabolic rate lower (0.22 +/- 0.02 to 0.28 +/- 0.02 l/h, P < 0.005) after the 55% CHO diet. Finally, there was an increase in lipoprotein lipase activity (7.0 +/- 0.8 to 8.1 +/- 0.7 mumol free fatty acids released .ml-1.h-1, P < 0.02) in response to the CHO-enriched diet. CONCLUSIONS--A low-fat high-CHO diet in patients with NIDDM led to 1) higher day-long plasma glucose, insulin, and TG concentrations; 2) postprandial accumulation of TG-rich lipoproteins of intestinal origin; 3) increased production of VLDL-TG; and 4) increased postheparin lipoprotein lipase activity. These data provide a mechanism for the hypertriglyceridemic effect of CHO-enriched diets in patients with NIDDM and demonstrate that multiple risk factors for coronary heart disease are accentuated when these individuals consume diets recommended to reduce this risk. Publication Types: Clinical trial Randomized controlled trial PMID: 7698030, UI: 95212174 "A new study suggests that level of triglyceride in the blood may help predict heart attack risk as well as other more well-known blood fats such as LDL and HDL cholesterol. High triglycerides alone increased the risk of heart attack nearly three-fold, according to a report in the current issue of Circulation. And people with the highest ratio of triglycerides to HDL -- the "good" cholesterol -- had 16 times the risk of heart attack as those with the lowest ratio of triglycerides to HDL in the study of 340 heart attack patients and 340 of their healthy, same age counterparts. The ratio of triglycerides to HDL was the strongest predictor of a heart attack, even more accurate than the LDL/HDL ratio," reported Harvard lead study author. Triglycerides, a mixture of fatty acids and glycerol that make up the principle fats in the blood, bind to carrier proteins, forming compounds known as lipoproteins. Other types of lipoproteins that carry cholesterol, such as LDL and HDL, are known to be related to the risk of heart disease because of their propensity to deposit -- or not deposit -- fat in coronary arteries. However, it has not been clear if triglyceride level could predict heart attack risk, despite years of research." Circulation (1997;96:2520-2525) "When the researchers accounted for other risk factors for stroke, people with more than 200 mg of triglycerides per dl of blood were nearly 30% more likely to have an ischemic stroke or TIA than people with lower levels of the blood fats. Ischemic strokes, which occur when a clot or narrowed artery cuts off the brain's blood supply, account for about 80% of all strokes. The other 20% are due to broken blood vessels in the brain High triglycerides and the low levels of HDL, or "good," cholesterol that usually coexist are important risk factors for the main type of stroke, called ischemic stroke, among patients with heart disease." Circulation December 11, 2001;104:2892-2897 Susan >x-no-archive: yes > >>No need to Jim, Please read the whole thread and get back to me. >> >>Sleepy Your study is irrelevant. There was no denial that elevated trigs are a negative factor in relation to heart disease. Even if your study were relevant, it would not apply to Julie, as she does not eat a high carb diet, unless considered by a low carb fanatic. The dispute concerns your reference to Julies diet. Following are quotes by Julie about what she eats that are previously included in this thread. "No longer a total vegetarian because of anemia, but most meals are still vegetarian. I don't eat white bread any more and very little in the way of processed foods. Breakfast is almost always light oatmeal bread and cottage cheese, lunch is bean dip made with no fat refried beans, a bit of cheese, 6 trans-fat free organic blue corn chips and plenty of raw veggies. Dinner is often soup or salad. I try to get at least an hour of exercise every day, but lately it has been less due to the knee injury." "My Drs. try to keep me off as many meds as possible because I tend to get really bad side effects from them. As for the baked goods, the only thing I eat is light oatmeal or whole grain bread and I don't eat that every day. My diet is very high in fiber, mainly from vegetables." If I could get them down I would. I just don't understand why the change. My diet hasn't changed that much. I am eating slightly less carbs than I was before, but I wouldn't think that would make that much of a difference." "My Endo. seems to think if I can lose more weight, the numbers will come down. Odd, but I really think in my case there is a connection between thyroid and weight loss. When mine was running hyper, it was harder than heck for me to lose weight. Now it's fine and the weight is coming off. I could understand if I was hypo thyroid. But hyper? I dunno." These are your "contributions" that I dispute: "Your TGLs and your visceral fat are telling you that your IR has progressed and that your diet is too high in sugar/starch." " That's the kind of diet that brought me IR and PCOS. My TGL dropped from 359 to 109 within two weeks of cutting starch and sugar from my diet." "They are carbohydrates, and that's about all you're eating. Sugar, in one form or another." "That's what causes elevated TGLs and worsening abdominal obesity due to progressive IR." "Not if you're artificially controlling it with meds. Mine was often too low when I was hyperinsulinemic." "What's healthy about a deadly level of TGLs and worsening insulin resistance, and the need for meds to control the damage from your diet?" Plus her A1c, though not 5% club, *ALL* things considered, it is far from dangerous. She needs to lower her trigs, I don't dispute that. I have been fighting a huge problem with trigs. My A1cs were a lot better than Julies, and I have finally gone under 200, from a high of 1862. Sleepy >Why do low-fat high-carbohydrate diets accentuate postprandial lipemia >in patients with NIDDM? [quoted text clipped - 87 lines] > >Susan ======== COWBOY UP! Magic Number=7 ======== >Your study is irrelevant. If you didn't understand it, you should just say so. I posted two other abstracts to go hand in hand with that one, they all tell a story together. You haven't refuted those. >There was no denial that elevated trigs are a negative factor in >relation to heart disease. Even if your study were relevant, it would >not apply to Julie, as she does not eat a high carb diet, unless >considered by a low carb fanatic. Do you know anything about what type of eating produces elevated TGLs? If you're diabetic, you can't afford not to! There's nothing fanatical about limiting carbs to a glycemic load that will prevent her body from producing such a high level of TGLs. What's wrong with vegetables in place of starch, for the record? What is fanatical is the insistence on eating fat free starch foods and chips when one is diabetic, as if they were healthy, all the while wondering why your lipids and abdominal fat are worsening. Her diet as described by her is deadly for a diabetic. >>>These are your "contributions" that I dispute:<< I don't recall your having posted any dispute or scientific refutation, I just recall your having called me a troll, telling me to get lost, and that I didn't know what I was talking about. Then some other ignorant blather. Why haven't you commented on the other abstracts, Sleepy? Maybe because you're really Dopey and Grumpy? ;-) Susan >x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > >Susan Susan by calling me Dopey or Grumpy, you have proved your point. Such an adult way to argue. I didn't call you a troll, but I do now. I didn't comment on the other abstracts because I took them as a whole. Now just take your other troll roose/mu, and go back amongst the lunatic fringe. Sleepy/Dopey/Grumpy ======== COWBOY UP! Magic Number=7 ======== > >x-no-archive: yes > > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >prevent her body from producing such a high level of TGLs. What's wrong with > >vegetables in place of starch, for the record? I eat plenty of vegetables, and *ding dong* *HELLO!* Vegetables are CARBS! What's with this starch crap? They're called carbohydrates. > >What is fanatical is the insistence on eating fat free starch foods and chips > >when one is diabetic, as if they were healthy, all the while wondering why your > >lipids and abdominal fat are worsening. Who is insisting on this? I eat 6 chips each day with my lunch. They are made with organic blue corn and no trans-fats. That's about 8 g of carb, less the fiber. The rest of my carbs at that meal come from dried beans and raw veggies. I try to be careful with the sources of my fats. These days, I think you have to. If I make a pot of beans from scratch, I add some olive oil. If I buy the canned ones, I buy fat free vegetarian because I don't think the lard they use in the other kind is healthy. > >Her diet as described by her is deadly for a diabetic. Well, sweety I'm still alive and kicking. How long have you been diabetic? > >>>>These are your "contributions" that I dispute:<< > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > > >Maybe because you're really Dopey and Grumpy? ;-) And you're not very nice. > Susan by calling me Dopey or Grumpy, you have proved your point. Such > an adult way to argue. I didn't call you a troll, but I do now. I > didn't comment on the other abstracts because I took them as a whole. > > Now just take your other troll roose/mu, and go back amongst the > lunatic fringe. If indeed she is chums with the above mentioned person, I shall have no further contact with her. SignatureJulie Bove/not Dopey but getting Grumpy at reading all this Type 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >I eat plenty of vegetables, and *ding dong* *HELLO!* Vegetables are CARBS! >What's with this starch crap? They're called carbohydrates. Starch carbs are a much poorer choice for diabetics or those who are IR. I think it's great that you also eat lots of vegetables. >Who is insisting on this? I eat 6 chips each day with my lunch. They are >made with organic blue corn and no trans-fats. That's about 8 g of carb, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >olive oil. If I buy the canned ones, I buy fat free vegetarian because I >don't think the lard they use in the other kind is healthy. Chips, fat free beans are a very high glycemic meal. Your TGLs confirm this is how you eat regularly. >Well, sweety I'm still alive and kicking. How long have you been diabetic? I hope you live long and prosper. I guess I think that your TGLs and worsening visceral fat accumulation means you could be doing better to maintain good health status, but that's up to you to decide. I guess I've been diabetic for over a decade, most of that undiagnosed, even when I developed severe peripheral neurophathies, dyslipidemia, hypoglycemia, etc. Once I learned about IR, I changed my diet and my lipids improved dramatically at that time just by eliminating starches from my diet. My TGL went from 359 to 100 in two weeks. >And you're not very nice. But I am. The man called me stupid, uninformed, a troll and a lunatic. Did you miss the smiley? He didn't use any. >If indeed she is chums with the above mentioned person, I shall have no >further contact with her. You can't be serious, right? I've had the R**se creep kill filed since shortly after he appeared on usenet. Susan > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Starch carbs are a much poorer choice for diabetics or those who are IR. I > think it's great that you also eat lots of vegetables. The only person who has said I am IR is you. None of my Drs. have said it. > >Who is insisting on this? I eat 6 chips each day with my lunch. They are > >made with organic blue corn and no trans-fats. That's about 8 g of carb, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Chips, fat free beans are a very high glycemic meal. Your TGLs confirm this is > how you eat regularly. And the GI has not been proven. I don't know how GI and insulin resistance pair up. I do know that when I tried eating the various foods according to the GI, I got better BG results with some things like white bread and potatoes. Go figure! > >Well, sweety I'm still alive and kicking. How long have you been diabetic? > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > But I am. The man called me stupid, uninformed, a troll and a lunatic. Did > you miss the smiley? He didn't use any. I'm inclined to agree with him. > >If indeed she is chums with the above mentioned person, I shall have no > >further contact with her. > > You can't be serious, right? I've had the R**se creep kill filed since shortly > after he appeared on usenet. Okay... SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ > >And you're not very nice. > > But I am. The man called me stupid, uninformed, a troll and a > lunatic. Did > you miss the smiley? He didn't use any. Hello Sue, I watched this thread with increasing despair. You've just discovered why there really isn't much point in talking to the ng trolls. They seem to know next to nothing, blindly support each other, call others names and try to chase them away, and seem afraid of any new information. And to you snooze and jbove. I'm very disappointed, I leave you alone for one night and you start causing trouble straight away. You are revealing yourselves. SignatureBob Dx T1 4/4/2003, Insulatard & NovoRapid (trying zeroish carb - kiddies, do not try this at home) In article <bm8lm2$jrgof$1@ID-189936.news.uni-berlin.de>, Bob ...with thanks for privacy to: [but for what beats me] rambled on; +On 11-Oct-2003, sufein@aol.comnospam (Susan ) wrote: + +> >And you're not very nice. +> +> But I am. The man called me stupid, uninformed, a troll and a +> lunatic. Did +> you miss the smiley? He didn't use any. +Hello Sue, I watched this thread with increasing despair. You've just +discovered why there really isn't much point in talking to the ng +trolls. They seem to know next to nothing, blindly support each other, +call others names and try to chase them away, and seem afraid of any new +information. +And to you snooze and jbove. I'm very disappointed, I leave you alone +for one night and you start causing trouble straight away. You are +revealing yourselves. Bob you are such a dunce at times. dozey, bovine, hugs [or is that pugs], muck and mu plus you - oh nearly forgot - nette, cherie berry & finaly guynan are all either wannabee trolls or troll baiters. I think it is because they have so much time, nothing to do and very little else to discuss. So they just have to type something. They were revealed as you so badly put it, long before you errupted. Best Wishes Ds >Hello Sue, I watched this thread with increasing despair. You've just >discovered why there really isn't much point in talking to the ng >trolls. They seem to know next to nothing, blindly support each other, >call others names and try to chase them away, and seem afraid of any new >information. Well, if they're truly diabetic, and eating the way they describe, and with their numbers, they won't be around too long. Susan >x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Susan Birds of a feather....... SM ======== COWBOY UP! Magic Number=7 ======== >Susan by calling me Dopey or Grumpy, you have proved your point. Such >an adult way to argue. I didn't call you a troll, but I do now. I >didn't comment on the other abstracts because I took them as a whole. You keep saying these vague, non-specific things that mean nothing. You "took them as a whole?" What, exactly, did they mean, together, then? >Now just take your other troll roose/mu, and go back amongst the >lunatic fringe. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Magic Number=7 >======== You seem to fling insults and opinions freely and in every direction around here, bereft of any basis in science and medicine. That's completely troll like. But it would be really rude and heavy handed to call you a troll just because I think you don't know anything and I disagree with you on just about everything. Susan > You seem to fling insults and opinions freely and in every direction around > here, bereft of any basis in science and medicine. That's completely troll > like. Actually, he is slinging facts. You are doing the other stuff. > But it would be really rude and heavy handed to call you a troll just because I > think you don't know anything and I disagree with you on just about everything. Yes it would. And not wise either! :) SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Why do low-fat high-carbohydrate diets accentuate postprandial lipemia > in patients with NIDDM? <snip it right there!> I am not on such a diet. So as I said before, what you are saying does not relate to me. I hate it when people imply that I'm stupid. I got an A+ in advanced biology. I do understand these things. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ > >>They are carbohydrates, and that's about all you're eating. Sugar, in one form > >>or another. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Please do a web search on basic nutrition. Susan is correct. I have studied nutrition and she is NOT correct. By all means, high triglycerides have been tied in to a diet that entails eating excess carbs, particularly of the refined variety. I would not call my diet that kind of diet at all. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >> Please do a web search on basic nutrition. Susan is correct. > >I have studied nutrition and she is NOT correct. By all means, high >triglycerides have been tied in to a diet that entails eating excess carbs, >particularly of the refined variety. I would not call my diet that kind of >diet at all. Carbs are a part of the triglyceride as a whole. Fat is the major component however. Sleepy ======== COWBOY UP! Magic Number=7 ======== >Carbs are a part of the triglyceride as a whole. Fat is the major >component however. > >Sleepy Cites, please. Ones where the data support that conclusion. No wonder your numbers aren't better than they are. Susan > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > No wonder your numbers aren't better than they are. Lookie here! It not only mentions the fats, but says that we should eat a diet primarily of grains, beans, fruits, vegetables and low-fat animal products! Sorry, I can't do the fruit. I've tried. I really have. I just hate fruit and it upsets my tummy. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ http://www.henryfordhealth.org/11659.cfm >x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Cites, please. Ones where the data support that conclusion. Cites? Your programming wouldn't allow you to accept anything I bothered to cite, even if I were going to spend *my* time trying to prove something to you, which I am not going to do. My time is more valuable to me, than yours is to you. >No wonder your numbers aren't better than they are. My numbers aren't better, because I still have much work to do. However, given a choice , I would gladly keep my lousy (but improving) trigs, if I had to become one of the pod people to lower them. >Susan Your Pal, Sleepy/Dopey/Goofy. BTW I never have, nor ever will, use "smileys" sheesh ======== COWBOY UP! Magic Number=7 ======== > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > They are carbohydrates, and that's about all you're eating. Sugar, in one form > or another. No, that's not about all I'm eating. I also eat fiber, fat and protein. > That's what causes elevated TGLs and worsening abdominal obesity due to > progressive IR. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Not if you're artificially controlling it with meds. Mine was often too low > when I was hyperinsulinemic. I wouldn't call it artificially controlling it. Some people need meds. Some don't. My need or no need for meds most certainly seems to be tied into how my thyroid is working. And, several references I looked at about triglycerides also tied thyroid problems to triglyceride problems. > > I can't cut all carbs > >from my diet. That's not a healthy diet and certainly not feasible for me > >to do. > > What's healthy about a deadly level of TGLs and worsening insulin resistance, > and the need for meds to control the damage from your diet? Deadly level? Who says I am at a deadly level? High, yes. But not deadly from what I've seen. And if the only way to control my triglycerides is to eat nothing but meat, then believe me I would MUCH rather be dead. And I mean that sincerely! SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >No, that's not about all I'm eating. I also eat fiber, fat and protein. Hi, Julie, The food day you described had very little protein the way you wrote it, and not much in the way of EFAs either. >I wouldn't call it artificially controlling it. Some people need meds. I agree that some people need meds, but many take them who wouldn't need them if they had a diet more appropriate to their metabolism. Whether or not you need them, and metformin is a very good drug, it's still artificial control. >Some don't. Many who are on meds stop needing them when they modify their diets. > My need or no need for meds most certainly seems to be tied >into how my thyroid is working. And, several references I looked at about >triglycerides also tied thyroid problems to >triglyceride problems. I guess that makes a good case for not eating that which raises TGLs. At least, that's how I would interpret it. >Deadly level? Who says I am at a deadly level? High, yes. High TGL is a predictive marker of CVD even in nonn-diabetics. In a diabetic, the risks are multiplied by other complications from the same dietary factors that raise TGLs. I wouldn't want mine any higher than 100. > But not deadly >from what I've seen. And if the only way to control my triglycerides is to >eat nothing but meat, then believe me I would MUCH rather be dead. And I >mean that sincerely! You seem to have a very either/or way of thinking. What makes you think that reducing carbs means eating nothing but meat? I certainly don't eat that way. There are a whole lot of healthier carb choices than bread, beans and chips. Look, what you decide to do is your business; your body, your science experiment. But I find it incredible that with all the collected knowledge here that you aren't making the connection between your bad lab results and increasing girth and your diet. Wishing you the best, Susan > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > The food day you described had very little protein the way you wrote it, and > not much in the way of EFAs either. Uh... No! I ate cottage cheese. I ate beans. I ate some hard cheese. I ALWAYS have at least 1 oz. of protein for breakfast and bedtime snack. Have at least 2 oz. for lunch and dinner. As for the Essential Fatty Acids, perhaps you should look here: http://home.howstuffworks.com/fat4.htm To quote a relevant part: "Omega-6 fatty acids are everywhere: corn oil, sunflower oil and soybean oil all contain them. Omega-3 fatty acids are harder to find. Things like flax seeds, pumpkin seeds and walnuts are high in omega-3 fatty acids, as are salmon, trout and tuna. Current thinking is that these two fats need to be balanced in the diet at a ratio like 1-to-1 or 2-to-1, rather than the normal 20-to-1 ratio seen in most Western diets. About the only way to do that is to supplement your diet with omega-3 vegetable oils or to start eating fish in a big way (meaning two or three times a week)." This would lead me to believe that most of us eating the Western diet would be lacking in Omega-6 if we did not take supplements. I do take a variety of supplements. I take CLA with each meal. Was taking Fish Oil but stopped it after having a leaky capsule on a hot day during a power failure. Was also taking Flaxseed Oil, but have stopped it at least temporarily to see if there is a decrease in my BG. If I see no difference, I will resume. Was eating Flaxseed meal but had to discontinue due to fiber overload. As I mentioned previously, I eat a very high fiber diet. No worries there. And I take Evening Primrose Oil daily. Walnuts were also mentioned as a source of Omega-3 oils. I eat those on my salad. I try to eat tuna several times a month. As for other fish, I hate it and you couldn't pay me to eat it. > >I wouldn't call it artificially controlling it. Some people need meds. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Whether or not you need them, and metformin is a very good drug, it's still > artificial control. I still disagree. Metformin will do nothing for me (in terms of BG) if I don't watch what I eat. > >Some don't. > > Many who are on meds stop needing them when they modify their diets. Many? I don't know about that. I've been on meds, then off meds, then on meds, then more meds. All tied in to my thyroid. > > My need or no need for meds most certainly seems to be tied > >into how my thyroid is working. And, several references I looked at about [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > I wouldn't want mine any higher than 100. Well, that's you. My Dr. doesn't see any dangers with my current numbers. > > But not deadly > >from what I've seen. And if the only way to control my triglycerides is to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > reducing carbs means eating nothing but meat? I certainly don't eat that way. > There are a whole lot of healthier carb choices than bread, beans and chips. Again, your opinion. I see nothing at all unhealthy about beans. And whole grains are healthy. As for the chips, I am eating only 6 per day. I have s ince looked up their fiber count and 13 chips have 5 g of fiber. Therefore my 6 chips have only 6.5 g of carbs. They contain stone ground corn, no bad fats and no chemicals. I see nothing wrong with that. BTW, what would YOU consider to be a healthy carb choice? Just curious. > Look, what you decide to do is your business; your body, your science > experiment. But I find it incredible that with all the collected knowledge > here that you aren't making the connection between your bad lab results and > increasing girth and your diet. Increasing girth? I have lost 12 pounds. Last time I took math, that was a decrease! *L* I also wouldn't call my lab results "bad". My Dr. was quite pleased with them. I should add that I have a whole slew of other medical problems besides the diabetes. Currently, none of these are causing me trouble. For that I am grateful. > Wishing you the best, Yeah, right! SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >> x-no-archive: yes >> [quoted text clipped - 115 lines] > >Yeah, right! Julie, You are wasting your time arguing with a "true believer" She has found her god. Her god is extreme low carb, and anyone who uses meds. is using artificial means so they can stuff themselves with forbidden items. It is the same old bs we have heard so many times before. She reads selectively and anything that doesn't fit in her restrictive little box is to be condemned. Arguing with her type is a waste of bandwidth. She hears what she wants, and that isn't going to change. Later, Sleepy ======== COWBOY UP! Magic Number=7 ======== > Julie, You are wasting your time arguing with a "true believer" She > has found her god. Her god is extreme low carb, and anyone who uses [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > waste of bandwidth. She hears what she wants, and that isn't going to > change. Later, You are right of course. Gee, I hope she doesn't find out that I wear nail polish and bras. Not padded ones mind you, but I suppose their use lends artificial means to the perkiness of my bazoombas. I may or may not check back again before I leave town. Won't be back until late on Monday. And no, Susan didn't drive me out of town. Hehe! Going to PA, land of Wise Potato Chips. That's right. Chips! I know places where you can get them sometimes for free! Oh yeah. I am going to such a place too. And I might just... I might just... No, I can't say it. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ I'm sorry Julie but you seem to be all over the place and not making much sense. Susan is putting forward a very rational and sensible POV and you just don't seem to get it. As for sleepy he seems to make decisions based on majority rule, not good science or commonsense. Cheers, Michael >I'm sorry Julie but you seem to be all over the place and not making much >sense. Susan is putting forward a very rational and sensible POV and you [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Cheers, >Michael OK there Mr. 3 Week diabetic, you tell me who this majority I am going along with consists of. Names please. You and Susan just continue to be pod people if that is what makes you happy. SM ======== COWBOY UP! Magic Number=6 ======== > >I'm sorry Julie but you seem to be all over the place and not making much > >sense. Susan is putting forward a very rational and sensible POV and you [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Magic Number=6 > ======== I would say that most nutritionists, endo's, cardiologists and other health professionals, the FDA, WHO various health organizations and the majority of the general public advocate low fat-high carb diets. I'd say your POV is that of the majority. It may only be three weeks since diagnosis but I wish I knew what I know now ten years ago. Good luck with getting your numbers down. Cheers Michael >> >I'm sorry Julie but you seem to be all over the place and not making much >> >sense. Susan is putting forward a very rational and sensible POV and you [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >the general public advocate low fat-high carb diets. I'd say your POV is >that of the majority. Well then I would say you don't know what you are talking about >It may only be three weeks since diagnosis but I wish I knew what I know now >ten years ago. And as you prove, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. >Good luck with getting your numbers down. >Cheers >Michael I don't need to get my numbers down. Do you know what my numbers are? Because I am not a pod person, I attempt to eat a balanced diet. If 100 carbs/day on a 1900-2000 calorie diet, is a low fat, high carb diet in the eyes of the pod people then so be it. So before you start throwing stones, know your target. Good luck with your long term health. You will need it. Sleepy ======== COWBOY UP! Magic Number=5 ======== > I don't need to get my numbers down. Do you know what my numbers are? > Because I am not a pod person, I attempt to eat a balanced diet. If > 100 carbs/day on a 1900-2000 calorie diet, is a low fat, high carb > diet in the eyes of the pod people then so be it. So before you start > throwing stones, know your target. Good luck with your long term > health. You will need it. Do you see that Sleepy? I ask him a couple of direct questions and he doesn't answer me either. Both he and Susan are evasive. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >> I don't need to get my numbers down. Do you know what my numbers are? >> Because I am not a pod person, I attempt to eat a balanced diet. If [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Do you see that Sleepy? I ask him a couple of direct questions and he >doesn't answer me either. Both he and Susan are evasive. Yup, I saw it. The pod people are only programmed to answer certain things. Ask them a question they are not programmed for, they get very confused. Sleepy ======== COWBOY UP! Magic Number=5 ======== > >> I don't need to get my numbers down. Do you know what my numbers are? > >> Because I am not a pod person, I attempt to eat a balanced diet. If [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Magic Number=5 > ======== I'm not sure what you mean? >Do you see that Sleepy? I ask him a couple of direct questions and he >doesn't answer me either. Both he and Susan are evasive. What exactly did I fail to answer? I just decided you're not worth my time at a certain point. Susan > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > What exactly did I fail to answer? I just decided you're not worth my time at > a certain point. You said that bread, beans and organic corn chips were not good for diabetics to eat and that there were a lot better choices. I then asked you what those choices were. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >You said that bread, beans and organic corn chips were not good for >diabetics to eat and that there were a lot better choices. I then asked you >what those choices were. If I failed to answer then I'm sorry. Lord knows, all the diabetics on this group who've got great lipids and A1c numbers talk about what to eat a lot, so I'm kind of surprised you'd ask me, a newcomer you've labeled a troll. Instead of chips, beans and bread, I'd substitute nuts, some healthy fats with low carb black soybeans, some dairy for snacks. And some quality protein; your diet as described by you is inadequate in protein. Beans are not an adequate protein source at any meal. If you don't want to eat meat, at least have some tempeh, or seitan, or eggs with each meal, though these aren't as good a source as fish, fowl and meats. I replace chips with raw sugar snap peas or cucumbers. If I want to dip in some baba ghanouj, I use low carb, high fiber mountain bread or veggies. Just a few examples. Susan > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Instead of chips, beans and bread, I'd substitute nuts, some healthy fats I already eat nuts. > with > low carb black soybeans, Try to avoid soy due to thyroid problems. >some dairy for snacks. I do eat dairy for my bedtime snack, but I must have enough carbs or I wake with high BG. >And some quality protein; your > diet as described by you is inadequate in protein. No, it's not! The dietician was going to have me eat 4 oz. of protein per day. This was not enough for me so I had her up it to 6 oz. per day. I have since tweaked the diet a bit and I'll bet I'm eating closer to 8-9 oz. per day. >Beans are not an adequate > protein source at any meal. If you don't want to eat meat, at least have some > tempeh, or seitan, or eggs with each meal, though these aren't as good a source > as fish, fowl and meats. I do eat meat occasionally. And beans are a complete source of protein so long as you've eaten some form of grain at some point during the day. Tempeh sounds disgusting, and isn't it made with soy beans? Have no idea what seitan is. And I do eat eggs occasionally. Don't much care for them. > I replace chips with raw sugar snap peas or cucumbers. If I want to dip in > some baba ghanouj, I use low carb, high fiber mountain bread or veggies. Just > a few examples. I don't like cucumber much and while I do eat sugar snap peas occasionally, good ones are hard to come by. Not sure what baba ghanouj is, but I don't think I'd like it either. I dislike things with garlic or that are heaviily seasoned unless it's Mexican food. And Mountain bread? You told me that bread was not good for diabetics! And yet you eat it! What gives? Your diet sounds very low in carbs. That would never work for me. If I ate like that, I'd spend most of my time eating candy or something sweet to recover from the hypos I couldn't dig myself out of. And believe me, I did spend a great period of time doing just that. So I know of what I speak! Luckily, I don't have to be quite as careful with my diet now. But there was a period of times where I had to make certain to get enough carbs. One bite too little and I'd be passed out on the floor. And I was not on any diabetes meds either. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ Sorry Julie I haven't seen any questions otherwise, if reasonable, I would certainly have replied to them. Bigpond, an ISP in Australia, has been having lots of trouble recently with viruses and overloads which may possibly explain it. > > I don't need to get my numbers down. Do you know what my numbers are? > > Because I am not a pod person, I attempt to eat a balanced diet. If [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Type 2 > http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >Sorry Julie I haven't seen any questions otherwise, if reasonable, I would >certainly have replied to them. >Bigpond, an ISP in Australia, has been having lots of trouble recently with >viruses and overloads which may possibly explain it. bigpond is learning the hard way that allowing spammers and scammers to use their system has consequences. Mack Type 1 since 1975 http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org http://www.insulin-pumpers.org In tribute to the United States of America and the State of Israel, two bastions of strength in a world filled with strife and terrorism. >> > I don't need to get my numbers down. Do you know what my numbers are? >> > Because I am not a pod person, I attempt to eat a balanced diet. If [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> Type 2 >> http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >I don't need to get my numbers down. Do you know what my numbers are? >Because I am not a pod person, I attempt to eat a balanced diet. If [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Sleepy Sleepy I eat 50-100 carbs a day on an 1800 calorie diet.. I dont concider that high carb.. The diet Lilly gave me with 243 carbs on an 1800 calorie diet was a high carb diet... Sleepy, you are defintely not a Pod person.. LOL As always YMMV and this is JMO Jeanne Type 2 Diagnosed 05/28/02 189/154/120 >>I don't need to get my numbers down. Do you know what my numbers are? >>Because I am not a pod person, I attempt to eat a balanced diet. If [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >Jeanne Type 2 Diagnosed 05/28/02 >189/154/120 Thanks Jeanne, I try not to be one. What we try to eat is a rational balanced diet. It's the extremists who proselytize their extremism who turn into the pod people. Beware! Sleepy ======== COWBOY UP! Magic Number=5 ======== >Thanks Jeanne, I try not to be one. What we try to eat is a rational >balanced diet. It's the extremists who proselytize their extremism who >turn into the pod people. Beware! > >Sleepy LOL. I will watch out for them at every turn.. LOL Take care. As always YMMV and this is JMO Jeanne Type 2 Diagnosed 05/28/02 189/154/120 > And as you prove, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. As is arrogance. > >Good luck with getting your numbers down. > >Cheers > >Michael > > > I don't need to get my numbers down. Do you know what my numbers are? From previous post by sleepyman: She needs to lower her trigs, I don't dispute that. I have been fighting a huge problem with trigs. My A1cs were a lot better than Julies, and I have finally gone under 200, from a high of 1862. > Because I am not a pod person, I attempt to eat a balanced diet. If > 100 carbs/day on a 1900-2000 calorie diet, is a low fat, high carb [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Magic Number=5 > ======== Excuse my dangerously meagre knowledge but what is a POD person? Your diet sounds like where I'm heading Sleepy and I wouldn't consider it low fat - high carb. I apologise for jumping to conclusions on that one. However, I don't understand the animosity towards people using very low carb diets - especially to get somewhere weight, BG and blood fat wise. I'm about 20KG (about 44 pounds I think) overweight but my Trigs and both cholesterols are all in the normal range. My blood sugar since starting to watch what I eat has also been good. Thanks for your kind wishes regarding my future, Cheers, Michael >> And as you prove, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. > >As is arrogance. A little arrogance is a dangerous thing? Let me call the Bartlett people. >> >Good luck with getting your numbers down. >> >Cheers [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >fighting a huge problem with trigs. My A1cs were a lot better than >Julies, and I have finally gone under 200, from a high of 1862. My trigs were pretty awful 1862. Since I started my moderate low carb diet, I have shown an improvement of 96%. My lab range for trigs is <190. Mine is now 193. Of course I am still looking for improvement, and I expect to get it. When I get <150, I will feel better about it. My HDL is higher than my LDL. Guess what, I accomplished this WITHOUT atkins! So what's your point? PS my A1c has been under 6 for a year and a half, again WITHOUT atkins. I didn't have to buy *any* books, I didn't have to buy *any* overpriced garbage because it had atkins name on it either. >> Because I am not a pod person, I attempt to eat a balanced diet. If >> 100 carbs/day on a 1900-2000 calorie diet, is a low fat, high carb [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >However, I don't understand the animosity towards people using very low carb >diets - especially to get somewhere weight, BG and blood fat wise. Thanks for noticing that I, like many others here are not on low fat, high carb diets. This may get you in trouble with the pod people who believe anything that is not as extreme as they, are low fat, high carb heretics. The same goals can easily be reached using a more balanced, safer diet. It will not show you overnight quickie results that are unsustainable in the long run, and set you up for discouragement, and ultimate failure. A steady pace wins the race. I feel no animosity toward *people* using unbalanced diets. I do have an animosity toward the continual proselytizing of said diet. I think it is dangerous to anyone, especially newly diagnosed diabetics who are looking to grasp at any straw that they think will cure them, or make the disease non -life threatening. There is a low carb NG. for extremists, and I wish they would keep their propaganda there instead of going on recruitment raids here. AFAIAC atkins is a cult, no better nor worse than the Hare Krishnas, Moonies, the Manson Family, or PETA. To understand the term pod people, you *must* see the movie "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" a very campy flick that I can recommend highly. >I'm about 20KG (about 44 pounds I think) overweight but my Trigs and both >cholesterols are all in the normal range. My blood sugar since starting to >watch what I eat has also been good. >Thanks for your kind wishes regarding my future, >Cheers, >Michael Just wondering, but before you started atkins, what was you lipid profile? Sleepy ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Save the whales. Collect the whole set. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Just wondering, but before you started atkins, what was you lipid > profile? Chol: 5.5, Trig: 1.0, HDL -C: 1.1, LDL-C: 3.9 - all mmol/L Coronary risk ratio is 5 which is average. I am having my lipid profile done again next week which will be interesting. I have always enjoyed butter, cream and bacon and eggs and my numbers have always been fairly good. Which is why atkins and others who theorise that processed foods high in sugar and white flour are the problem and not the fats make sense to me. Cheers, Michael. >> Just wondering, but before you started atkins, what was you lipid >> profile? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >Cheers, >Michael. you don't mention A1c or daily Bg readings. Mack Type 1 since 1975 http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org http://www.insulin-pumpers.org In tribute to the United States of America and the State of Israel, two bastions of strength in a world filled with strife and terrorism. > you don't mention A1c or daily Bg readings. I'm yet to have my appointment with a specialist concerning my GP's diagnosis and as such I'm living in denial until confirmation or otherwise. (Waiting period of four weeks). In the mean time I have been on Atkins induction and had my Bg tested twice by my GP. Both times have shown improvement since initial diagnosis. GTT Fasting: 7.5, 1 hour: 17.4, 2 hour: 15.5. 1st Bg test - fasting: 6.5, 2nd Bg test - fasting: 5.9. I have lost 5 Kgs since GP diagnosis three weeks ago. As for A1c I don't think I've had the pleasure. >> Just wondering, but before you started atkins, what was you lipid >> profile? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >Cheers, >Michael. I don't know the conversion factors, but I will find them. Sugar and white flour are definately amongst major problems for a diabetic. And I eat a lot of bacon and eggs, though I avoid the cream, and go light on the butter. Sleepy ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Save the whales. Collect the whole set. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >Chol: 5.5, Trig: 1.0, HDL -C: 1.1, LDL-C: 3.9 - all mmol/L US Conversions: Chol: 212, Trig: 88,HDL: 42,LDL: 150. For cholesterol, HDL, LDL times 87.71 For Triglycerides, times 38.46. Sorry, forgotten the source. Cheers Alan, T2, Oz -- Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter. >>Chol: 5.5, Trig: 1.0, HDL -C: 1.1, LDL-C: 3.9 - all mmol/L > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Cheers Alan, T2, Oz Thanks Alan Sleepy ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Save the whales. Collect the whole set. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >Chol: 5.5, Trig: 1.0, HDL -C: 1.1, LDL-C: 3.9 - all mmol/L > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > -- > Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter. The maths doesn't seem quite right or do I misunderstand something. Cheers, Michael > > >Chol: 5.5, Trig: 1.0, HDL -C: 1.1, LDL-C: 3.9 - all mmol/L > > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Cheers, > Michael For conversion to US mg/dL multiply mmol/L cholesterol readings by 38.61, see; http://www.ulb.ac.be/erasme/edu/gastrocd/Convers.htm (If you are interested in converting mg/dL cholesterol readings to mmol/L , multiply by 0.0259) eg Total cholesterol 5.5 mmol/L = 212 mg/dL (fractions omitted for convenience). One way to avoid all this calculation when posting is to simply give the lab reference ranges. That way, no matter what system one has, readers can see at a glance how your numbers compare to the "normal range". In Oz, I normally use the mmol/L system. l When I want to do a comparison for the mg/dL figures most use here, I look at the lab range at; http://www.about-cholesterol-levels.com/html/cholesterol-levels.php3 It gives one a pretty good idea of what is considered to be a healthy reading. And *that* is what matters. A healthy level of all the lipid readings, whatever system of measurement one uses. Annette >> > On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 23:23:37 GMT, Sleepyman <eat@moms.com> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.528 / Virus Database: 324 - Release Date: 17/10/03 Sorry - I accidentally reversed the figures as Annette pointed out. Thus the trigs are X 87.71 etc. Cheers Alan, T2, Oz -- Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter. > >For conversion to US mg/dL multiply mmol/L cholesterol readings by > >38.61, see; [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >eg Total cholesterol 5.5 mmol/L = 212 mg/dL (fractions omitted for > >convenience). > Sorry - I accidentally reversed the figures as Annette pointed out. > Thus the trigs are X 87.71 etc. > > Cheers Alan, T2, Oz Alan, I'd really appreciate it if you could find the original reference site for trygliceride conversions. I just don't seem to have one, although I thought I did. That's why I didn't mention it. Annette > Alan, I'd really appreciate it if you could find the original > reference site for trygliceride conversions. > I just don't seem to have one, although I thought I did. That's why > I didn't mention it. > > Annette http://dwjay.tripod.com/conversion.html SignatureJoin us in the Diabetic-Talk Chatroom on UnderNet /server irc.undernet.org --- /join #Diabetic-Talk More info: http://www.diabetic-talk.org/ Thanks Jim, although it doesn't give the actual conversion factor I was seeking, it looks really handy. Annette > > Alan, I'd really appreciate it if you could find the original > > reference site for trygliceride conversions. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > /server irc.undernet.org --- /join #Diabetic-Talk > More info: http://www.diabetic-talk.org/ > Thanks Jim, although it doesn't give the actual conversion factor I > was seeking, it looks really handy. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.528 / Virus Database: 324 - Release Date: 17/10/03 Annette, I use it because it covers almost *anything* I could want to convert. If you want the factor for Cholesterol (TChol, LDL, HDL), just enter 1 mmol/L and see that it equals 38.67 mg/dL. Likewise, selecting Triglycerides and 1 mmol/l shows that the conversion factor is 88.34. Jim SignatureJoin us in the Diabetic-Talk Chatroom on UnderNet /server irc.undernet.org --- /join #Diabetic-Talk More info: http://www.diabetic-talk.org/ Many thanks Jim. I now have it bookmarked. Annette > > Thanks Jim, although it doesn't give the actual conversion factor I > > was seeking, it looks really handy. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > /server irc.undernet.org --- /join #Diabetic-Talk > More info: http://www.diabetic-talk.org/ >Alan, I'd really appreciate it if you could find the original >reference site for trygliceride conversions. >I just don't seem to have one, although I thought I did. That's why >I didn't mention it. > >Annette Hi Annette Found mine, which gives slightly different figures to JC, at http://members.iinet.net.au/~bill/java/index.html I'm not really worried too much about decimal points. As a rough rule of thumb I multiply by 40 and 90 respectively unless it's important. It's just that my brain reverses things occasionally - my excuse is that I'm left-handed. Left-handers are the only right-thinking people. Cheers Alan, T2, Oz -- Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter. > > > On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 23:23:37 GMT, Sleepyman <eat@moms.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.528 / Virus Database: 324 - Release Date: 17/10/03 Thanks for the info Annette. Cheers, Michael. > Thanks for noticing that I, like many others here are not on low fat, > high carb diets. This may get you in trouble with the pod people who > believe anything that is not as extreme as they, are low fat, high > carb heretics. The same goals can easily be reached using a more > balanced, safer diet. <snip> But the strange thing is Sleepy, when I WAS adhering to the low fat diet and eating more carbs than I am now, all aspects of my cholesterol were fine and my A1c was in the 4's or 5's. I think my numbers relate less to how I eat and more to how my diabetes is progressing. That and perhaps a combination of my other medical problems. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ > I would say that most nutritionists, The word "nutritionist" is meaningless. Anyone can be a nutritionist. It is a dietician that should be seen. >endo's, cardiologists and other health > professionals, the FDA, WHO various health organizations and the majority of > the general public advocate low fat-high carb diets. I'd say your POV is > that of the majority. Then look at the diet more closely. Low fat, yes. High carb? The portion size of carbs for diabetics is a lot lower than you might think. My diet consists of a LOT less carbs than it used to. > It may only be three weeks since diagnosis but I wish I knew what I know now > ten years ago. > Good luck with getting your numbers down. If you were diagnosed only three weeks ago, then you know very little. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ I thought you said you had asked me questions. It seems to me you're just making statements. > > I would say that most nutritionists, > > The word "nutritionist" is meaningless. Anyone can be a nutritionist. It > is a dietician that should be seen. Any one can be a dietician it just requires indoctrination. If a dietician gives you a diet that isn't nutritious you die. I'd say nutrition is the starting point of any diet. > >endo's, cardiologists and other health > > professionals, the FDA, WHO various health organizations and the majority [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > size of carbs for diabetics is a lot lower than you might think. My diet > consists of a LOT less carbs than it used to. In the context of what I was talking about I was meaning the diet the"majority" of people use not the diabetic minority. But I will add, from my store of very little knowledge, it seems the majority of opinion concerning diets for diabetics is generally more concerned about fat intake than carb intake and I think this has been unduly influenced by high carb-low fat consensus espouse by the mainstream. > > It may only be three weeks since diagnosis but I wish I knew what I know > now > > ten years ago. > > Good luck with getting your numbers down. > > If you were diagnosed only three weeks ago, then you know very little. Yes you are correct. > -- > Type 2 > http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ Good luck, Cheers, Michael. > I thought you said you had asked me questions. It seems to me you're just > making statements. I did ask questions, but it has been so long now that I don't remember what they were. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ The original questions were aimed at Susan. Sleepy >I thought you said you had asked me questions. It seems to me you're just >making statements. [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] >Cheers, >Michael. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Save the whales. Collect the whole set. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > I'm sorry Julie but you seem to be all over the place and not making much > sense. How am I all over the place? How am I not making sense? What part of my post did you not understand? >Susan is putting forward a very rational and sensible POV and you > just don't seem to get it. I don't seem to get it because she is using a flawed premise. She hasn't effectively proven anything she said! She told me that beans, bread and organic corn chips were not good for a diabetic to eat. And when I asked her what foods would be better than this, she gave no reply. > As for sleepy he seems to make decisions based on majority rule, not good > science or commonsense. Sleepy has been posting here for a long time. Believe me, he does NOT make decisions of majority rule! Don't make me laugh! *Oops!* You already did! SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ In article <vod41cdqpluk05@corp.supernews.com>, Julie Bove scribbled hurriedly; +"oldal4865" <oldal4865@yahoo.com> wrote in message +news:bm60au$j7brg$1@ID-121441.news.uni-berlin.de... +> Metformin has a good reputation for knocking down triglycerides. +That might be so, but it doesn't seem to be helping me! Triglycerides have +gone up since starting it. Perhaps it is your diet rather than the medicine. Maybe your physiological requirements operate in a different way and you have not recognised that, prefering to trough according to some advice designed to serve the majority. Best wishes Ds >HDL was 36 (normal >/= 40), LDL was 68 (normal <130) Julie how does this add up to 173? 68 plus 36 is 104 As always YMMV and this is JMO Jeanne Type 2 Diagnosed 05/28/02 189/154/120 > >HDL was 36 (normal >/= 40), LDL was 68 (normal <130) > > Julie how does this add up to 173? 68 plus 36 is 104 I dunno. I was just typing in what it says on my labs. My prior labs say: total cholesterol 179, HDL 38, LDL, 99. And prior still, total cholesterol 178, HDL 36, LDL 99. Those don't add up either. It does say LDL, calculated. I suspect that means something, but I don't know what... SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ >>>HDL was 36 (normal >/= 40), LDL was 68 (normal <130) >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > 178, HDL 36, LDL 99. Those don't add up either. It does say LDL, > calculated. I suspect that means something, but I don't know what... TChol = HDL + LDL + (TG / 5) Jim SignatureJoin us in the Diabetic-Talk Chatroom on UnderNet /server irc.undernet.org --- /join #Diabetic-Talk More info: http://www.diabetic-talk.org/ >> I dunno. I was just typing in what it says on my labs. My prior labs say: >> total cholesterol 179, HDL 38, LDL, 99. And prior still, total cholesterol [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Jim Okay finally got it.. Thanks all. My last one was toal 183 HDL 50 LDL 114 and Trig 95 =183 As always YMMV and this is JMO Jeanne Type 2 Diagnosed 05/28/02 189/154/120 >Okay finally got it.. Thanks all. >My last one was toal 183 >HDL 50 LDL 114 and Trig 95 =183 >As always YMMV and this is JMO >Jeanne Type 2 Diagnosed 05/28/02 >189/154/120 See, a year with this, and Im still learning new things here.. Love it. As always YMMV and this is JMO Jeanne Type 2 Diagnosed 05/28/02 189/154/120 >> >HDL was 36 (normal >/= 40), LDL was 68 (normal <130) >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >178, HDL 36, LDL 99. Those don't add up either. It does say LDL, >calculated. I suspect that means something, but I don't know what... Wierd.. As always YMMV and this is JMO Jeanne Type 2 Diagnosed 05/28/02 189/154/120 >HDL was 36 (normal >/= 40), LDL was 68 (normal <130) > Julie how does this add up to 173? 68 plus 36 is 104 Julie, I think if you add in the VDL you will find it adds up. >I dunno. I was just typing in what it says on my labs. My prior labs say: >total cholesterol 179, HDL 38, LDL, 99. And prior still, total cholesterol >178, HDL 36, LDL 99. Those don't add up either. It does say LDL, >calculated. I suspect that means something, but I don't know what... -- Terrell type 2, dumped the metformin D&E for now... This post not CC'd by email >>HDL was 36 (normal >/= 40), LDL was 68 (normal <130) > >Julie how does this add up to 173? 68 plus 36 is 104 G'day G'day Jeanne, I think the clue is in the original post quoted below for your convenience. >Cholesterol >is doing wacky things again though. This time the total cholesterol was 173 >(normal <200), HDL was 36 (normal >/= 40), LDL was 68 (normal <130), >Cholesterol/HDL ratio 4.8 (normal <4.4) and Triglycerides were 346. Eek! >Don't know what it's going to take to get that down. The numbers work if you add one fifth of the triglycerides. HDL = 36 LDL = 68 Fifth of TG (346/5) = 69 Total Cholesterol = 173 Best wishes, >As always YMMV and this is JMO >Jeanne Type 2 Diagnosed 05/28/02 >189/154/120 SignatureQuentin Grady ^ ^ / New Zealand, >#,#< [ / \ /\ "... and the blind dog was leading." http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin >The numbers work if you add one fifth of the triglycerides. > > HDL = 36 > LDL = 68 > Fifth of TG (346/5) = 69 > Total Cholesterol = 173 okay got it.. You know I never noticed.. As always YMMV and this is JMO Jeanne Type 2 Diagnosed 05/28/02 189/154/120 >HDL was 36 (normal >/= 40), LDL was 68 (normal <130) >Julie how does this add up to 173? 68 plus 36 is 104 > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Fifth of TG (346/5) = 69 > Total Cholesterol = 173 Oh so it's part of the trigs that make up the total Choleterol number? Thanks Quentin, JC (Jim), always learning something new from you guys! -- Terrell type 2, dumped the metformin D&E for now... Sorry what is the significance of "69" ie. (1/5 of TG).. ?? Larry This post not CC'd by email >Sorry what is the significance of "69" ie. (1/5 of TG).. ?? > >Larry G'day G'day Larry, To get the total cholesterol one uses a formula, Total cholesterol = HDL + LDL + TG/5. Since the enquirer's triglycerides, TG, were 346 we took one fifth of that and got 69 for TG/5. >The numbers work if you add one fifth of the triglycerides. > > HDL = 36 > LDL = 68 > Fifth of TG (346/5) = 69 > Total Cholesterol = 173 If you prefer decimals to fractions you might prefer to write the formula as, Total cholesterol = HDL + LDL + 0.2 x TG Which ever way you write it, the triglyceride contribution needs to be worked out first. Most modern calculators do this naturally. Feel free to ask any further questions you might have. Best wishes, SignatureQuentin Grady ^ ^ / New Zealand, >#,#< [ / \ /\ "... and the blind dog was leading." http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin This post not CC'd by email >Sorry what is the significance of "69" ie. (1/5 of TG).. ?? > >Larry G'day G'day Larry, It occurs to me I might have misinterpreted the question implied in the word "significance." It could be that you were interested in why only one fifth of TG is used when the whole HDL and LDL were used. Please forgive me if this is so. In my simple understanding the conventional wisdom is that triglycerides are thought to be one fifth as significant as the other lipoproteins which carry cholesterol as well as fats. Perhaps someone has a better explanation. I wouldn't be surprised. Best wishes, SignatureQuentin Grady ^ ^ / New Zealand, >#,#< [ / \ /\ "... and the blind dog was leading." http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin >Oh so it's part of the trigs that make up the total Choleterol >number? > >Thanks Quentin, JC (Jim), always learning something new from you >guys! My doc told me that VLDL is calculated by taking a fifth of the Trigs, so it ends up the same. Sleepy ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Save the whales. Collect the whole set. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Saw my Endo. today and he was pleased. Most of my numbers were good. > Thyroid is in range again and A1c is 6.1. Was 6.3 last time. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > ball is working for me. Or was. Got to wait for the knee to heal more > before I try hopping again. Do you drink any alcohol...wine, beer perhaps ? I was told that even a single drink in the days before a blood test can throw the triglycerides off... > Do you drink any alcohol...wine, beer perhaps ? I was told that even a > single drink in the days before a blood test can throw the triglycerides > off... No. I had tried the red wine before bed, but I am not able to drink any more than about 2 oz. or I get really looped. Perhaps the amount I was drinking was too small, but it seemed to have no effect on anything. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ Congratulatons on your weight loss, That is great, It is good to see your aic went down, I am sure it will steadily decline. Did the doctor offer you tricor for the triglycerides. If you eat baked goods that is one reason for higher tris. Get those numbers down and if you need meds, dont be afraid to take them. I had 1800 tris years ago, My latest wwas 200 and I am on tricor. Loretta -- In tribute to the United States of America and the State of Israel, two bastions of strength in a world filled with strife and terrorism. > Congratulatons on your weight loss, That is great, It is good to see > your aic went down, I am sure it will steadily decline. > > Did the doctor offer you tricor for the triglycerides. If you eat baked > goods that is one reason for higher tris. No. My Drs. try to keep me off as many meds as possible because I tend to get really bad side effects from them. As for the baked goods, the only thing I eat is light oatmeal or whole grain bread and I don't eat that every day. My diet is very high in fiber, mainly from vegetables. > Get those numbers down and if you need meds, dont be afraid to take > them. If I could get them down I would. I just don't understand why the change. My diet hasn't changed that much. I am eating slightly less carbs than I was before, but I wouldn't think that would make that much of a difference. > I had 1800 tris years ago, My latest wwas 200 and I am on tricor. My Endo. seems to think if I can lose more weight, the numbers will come down. Odd, but I really think in my case there is a connection between thyroid and weight loss. When mine was running hyper, it was harder than heck for me to lose weight. Now it's fine and the weight is coming off. I could understand if I was hypo thyroid. But hyper? I dunno. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ You know Julie for some people no matter what they do, the cholesterol and tris stay up, Our own bodies can manufacture them Loretta -- In tribute to the United States of America and the State of Israel, two bastions of strength in a world filled with strife and terrorism. Way to go Julie. Congratulations on the weight loss, and I hope your knee heals quickly. :-) -- Cheri Julie Bove wrote in message ... >But the best news is that I have lost 12 pounds! Looks like that hop ball >is working for me. Or was. Got to wait for the knee to heal more before I [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Type 2 >http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.