The Guardian has a headline saying this today:
I have to admit I think this is really stupid and a massive waste of money.
That is because all that the tool really needs to ask is one question:
- Does your diet almost wholly or mainly comprise ultra-processed food?
That is it. If the answer is yes, then the risk of developing type 2 diabetes is very high.
If the answer is no, the risk is so much lower that the NHS will not have time to worry about you because it is being overwhelmed by people who answer 'yes' to that question.
And before anyone accuses me of being simplistic, I suggest you stand back for a moment and do a little thought experiment.
Suppose the UK's population of dogs had, over a relatively short period, shown a marked increase in the canine equivalent of type 2 diabetes and all the deeply significant related diseases, and this had happened whatever the income of their owners, meaning pure economic factors can be excluded from consideration.
There must, then, either be a simultaneous genetic alteration in the dogs of the world, changing pre-disposition to this illness, or some other factor in play. That genetic change over such a short period is extraordinarily unlikely. In fact, it is so unlikely that the possibility can be dismissed.
We are, then, looking for an external factor that explains this change that is unrelated to income or the genome. That leaves three options, which are the physical inputs into dogs over the period: air, water and food.
Air quality has risen, broadly speaking, over the last forty years. It is still not great, and there are threats from it, but things like lead have dramatically reduced. So, air is unlikely to be a major factor.
Overall, water quality in the UK has fallen, but this is not apparent in drinking water as yet - and let's assume most dogs, most of the time, drink tap water to make this a proxy for human experience. It is very unlikely water is to blame, then.
So, food could be because food has changed massively. Since the 1970s, there has been an extraordinary boom in:
- Ultra-processed food, high in fructose
- The consumption of fast and convenience food
- Snacking
These have not been controlled by:
- Required diet control
- Appropriate exercise
Over that same period:
- Obesity has risen considerably
- Type 2 diabetes rates have gone through the roof
- They are still rising dramatically
- Related illnesses are of increasing significance
If we are still thinking about dogs, what conclusion would you draw? Might you suggest that the mass-produced dog food that most canines were consuming was the toxin that was poisoning them? I think you might. It would not be rocket science to do so. And then you would demand change to that food to end the cruelty it was creating.
Now, let's think about humans because what I have described is what has happened to us.
Why aren't we concluding it is our food that is poisoning us and making us ill?
Why aren't we worried about the vast amounts of ultra-processed food that will be consumed over the next few days?
What is it that makes us blind to the fact that we are being made ill by what we eat?
And why is it that politicians ignore the obvious fact that this must be the case?
Come to that, why aren't they demanding change?
Could the explanation be that the big food industry - mainly the food manufacturers and the supermarkets - are so heavily invested in that process of poisoning us that they ensure that the message as to what is happening is drowned out?
The evidence is that excess fructose delivery to the liver results in that organ then transforming that sugar into fat. This then results in the body increasing its intolerance to insulin, which perversely then results in increased insulin production. That then results in increased obesity, inflammatory diseases, kidney disease, and other conditions arising from metabolic illness. And it is also clear that this process is reversible remarkably quickly, which is a message that is being massively suppressed at present, even though it is apparent that many people could end their insulin dependence if only this were to happen in a controlled fashion, including the cutting out of carbohydrates in their diets.
I resist the idea of conspiracy theories as often as I can. On this issue, I cannot. There is a conspiracy. It is not even a theory. It's a fact.
And now we have hospitals saying AI can help solve the problem of type 2 diabetes by identifying who might get it, without in any way suggesting how that might then be prevented, when the real answer is much easier. Take those with type 2 diabetes off ultra-processed foods for a few weeks, and cut their carbs, and see what happens. For many (I am not saying all), their problems will be over. And the NHS could even afford to prescribe the food they need in that case.
The question is, why is the hospital trust keen to manage the symptoms and not suggest a cure? What is wrong when that is what is happening?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
watch the cats coming into your garden its not only humans getting fat my mums dog was diabetic
Snacking. When did we become a nation of snackers?
During my childhood I was given 3 cooked meals every day. Including school dinners. All of them were cooked from scratch. We did have chips, probably once per month. We occasionally had sweets or biscuits as treats. I don’t mean occasionally through the day, I mean possibly once per week.
We were told not to eat between meals.
Now it seems that snacks are vital to everyone’s lives. They even sell snacks especially for babies. Places that look after children advertise that they will be provided with lunch and snacks. There are entire aisles at the supermarket purely for crisps or their derivatives. People going on car journeys ensure they have a supply of snacks in the vehicle.
That change in eating habits can only have come about through extensive marketing. Snacks can be very cheaply made and sell at vast profits. So let’s persuade everyone that their life is incomplete without some nutrition-light regular food intake that also has the benefit of being addictive.
Ban the snack I say.
Agreed
I have done that in my own life.
There is no evidence that snacking is beneficial. Coincidentally it increases the profit margins of the snack food manufacturers.
Likewise, there is no evidence that breakfast is the most important meal of the day. Coincidentally it increases the profits of the cereal manufacturers.
Although promoted as an essential macronutrient, carbohydrates are not. You get diseases from not eating enough protein and fats. If you don’t eat carbohydrates, you get better (excess carbs can lead to diabetes).
Many things we are taught about nutrition are misleading.
A great deal to agree with.
The bizarre thing is, it turns out the best breakfast is bacon and eggs – fat and protein.
Absolutely. I only discovered recently that while people were criticising bacon for its nitrate content, it turns out that a serving of spinach has more.
I’ve never heard any nutritionists complain about spinach, not to mention its oxalate content too.
Absolutely – and FWIW when cooking your breakfast Ian, bin the “vegetable oil” and – if not forbidden – replace it with pork fat (‘lard’). Other than coconut oil with its medium chain fatty acids, lard is one of the healthiest fats on the planet.
Re Nitrates and nitrites, yes I an they are naturally occurring compounds found in both processed meats and vegetables. Nitrates and nitrites from vegetables are generally considered beneficial, while those from processed meats may be harmful (carcinogenic even) due to the fact they are cooked and how they interacti with other chemicals in the body. I’d say it is important to limit consumption of processed meats and focus on getting nitrates and nitrites from plant-based sources. More the merrier.
Spot on re carbohydrates too, Ian. Twenty something years ago an oncologist and good friend, Shiela, forced me to banish carbohydrates from my diet. My health improved immediately, The 2cm tumours on my liver (which had not yet grown into blood vessels or spread into lymph nodes ) and my ATP levels both reduced within 4. weeks, Sheila, the oncologist, has since incorporated carb-free diets into some of her hospital’s chemotherapy treatments. I’d probably not be here today but for that piece of pioneering advice.
Excellent
I like that
Agree with “vegetable oils”, or “seed oils” as they are sometimes called.
“Common cooking oil could be causing colon cancer surge in young people, warn doctors” (Thursday 19 December 2024)
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/cooking-oil-sunflower-corn-canola-colon-cancer-symptoms-b2666917.html
“Ultraprocessed Foods High in Seed Oils Could Be Fueling Colon Cancer Risk” (December 13, 2024)
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ultraprocessed-foods-high-in-seed-oils-could-be-fueling-colon-cancer-risk/
Olive oil seems ok….
But expensive
Our sons had a bottle each for Christmas, and both declared them much better than booze
The Truth about Cats and Dogs, with apologies for pinching the title of the film of the same name is that
1. They are fairly long lived and
2. Seem to live quite happily on ‘Proprietary’ pet food, ironically the biggest player in the field is – Mars
So its clearly possible to produce a ‘nutritionally balanced’ food but just for pets not their owners…….
There is a very similar story around the issue of cat and dog food.
Some pet foods are based on sawdust and poultry feathers (which provide carbohydrate and protein respectively for the statutory report on the product label), and regularly cause diarrhoea and/or obesity/diabetes.
They tended to be eaten by pedigree dogs and their chums.
I exaggerate only slightly, I’ve been round the factories in the harbours where the stuff is imported and seen all the ingredients and the machines that mix up the product. I’ve also studied animal nutrition in my uni days and also worked on early computer programs designed for farm animals to free farmers from manufactured sheep rations and substitute their own homegrown cereals with a few bought in mineral/vitamin supplements and homegrown roughage.
Other pet foods are healthy and safe. These are the less well known and less intensively (and expensively) marketed ones.
Human diets are in an far worse situation, and are less regulated. We used to regulate food production but not nowadays. Labels are a CON.
We worry about e numbers but swallow tonnes of sugar and salt in UPF.
Richard is right
Thanks
1] Get rid of the NHS Eat Well Plate its still carbo biased
2] Read a Dr Robert Atkins diet related book, I purchased his book – Dr Atkins Age Defying Diet Revolution -at the turn of the century-It’s a bit technical but info still relevent today.
Thanks for your blogs Richard. I manage to take in most of the content and really love your fluent writing style. I envy it
All the Best and
Compliments of the Season to you and your Family Richard
Many thanks, Roger.
Happy Christmas.
When I look up “what is the cause of type 2 diabetes”, nearly everywhere tells me it is due to problems with producing enough insulin.
Wearing my cynic hat, I see Big Pharma pushing the narrative that it is not down to individual choices, but something that can be controlled with medication (insulin injections). In the USA, diabetics die if they can not afford insulin. Diabetes is also not good for our health. Even Diabetes UK says that “Eating certain food can’t cause type 2 diabetes”.
Yet carbohydrates are linked with diabetes. See:
“Low-carb diets work. Why does the American Diabetes Association push insulin instead?” (Apr 2024)
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/17/ada-american-diabetes-association-big-pharma
“Does the American Diabetes Association work for patients or companies? A lawsuit dared to ask” (May 2024)
https://www.theguardian.com/global/commentisfree/2024/may/02/american-diabetes-association-lawsuit
The diet that will reverse your Type 2 Diabetes is here.. (by Dr Ken Berry MD)
https://x.com/KenDBerryMD/status/1820133814372581831
Check out the Diabetes Associations here and in the US.
They promote some very strange narratives.
This AI tool is looking at risks up to 13 years out.
Your cure as it’s stated would apply to people when Type 2 Diabetes presents itself, which isn’t a bad idea as it means those of us who are not sick are not going to be treated as if we are, but I don’t see any overlap between the two approaches of yours in your penultimate paragraph and the AI tool.
I am saying if we had decent diets that tool would be completely unnecessary.
But for all those promoting the bacon/egg/Western animal-based diet, consider the rates of diabetes/CHD/digestive problems in so-called developing countries which – crucial proviso – still follow the traditional diet of wholegrains, root veg, sweet potatoes, taro, plantains, etc, etc.
Their rate of diabetes type 2, diverticulitis, IBS, Crohn’s is essentially nil. I mean, those things just don’t exist in those places. When that diet is given up for a Western diet – see above all the Pacific islands, 9 out of the top 10 most obese nations – the diseases of the West crowd in exponentially.
But the power of the milk/meat/dairy lobbies in a West captured by corporations is probably unbeatable, so they win, and public health doesn’t.
The rate of cancers is also incredibly low.
And your arguments are right.
“Exclusive: Two London hospital trusts to trial tool that can predict those at risk up to 13 years before condition develops”
That tool is called “postcodes”, and it tells them all they need to know.
Another interesting issue is Gluten Intolerance.
I suggest that there is quite a lot of ‘hypochondria’ involved but quite a few people I have met experience genuine problems if they eat foods – or beer containing gluten.
I know those who definitely do.
Might another factor in the increase in Type 2 Diabetes be a national curriculum which backgrounds/ignores food preparation, dietary knowledge and positive eating attitudes?
Might it be an inevitable consequence, or purpose, of a dehumanising national curriculum which puts great effort, time, money and attitude management into labelling our children with questionable numbers at the cost of encouraging and enabling them to live safer, more enjoyable and longer lives?
Might structures, political as well as educational, defined by linear power, penny pinching, and the objectification of individuals and groups, which avoid areas of learning which are creative, innovative, critical thinking dynamic and mostly kindly fun, be machines for stunting our students who are our future citizens?,
I wonder what will trigger entry into the study given that GP data and hospital data in general have no linkage. Is this one of those “American companies are collecting and analysing our data without explicit consent” type studies I wonder.
I had a letter just last week under the NHS logo but from a private company inviting me to take part in a study which would require me to have a blood test and answer questions about my health on an ongoing basis. It’s gone in the recycling now but, if I remember rightly, it was to do with predicting health outcomes from blood samples, so it seems that it’s all under way already.
The good old English Breakfast ( no hash browns) rules!
A good rule of thumb for identifying ultra processed foods is to avoid foods with these “approved” colours, preservatives, antioxidants, sweeteners, emulsifiers, stabilisers, thickeners and other additives.
https://www.food.gov.uk/business-guidance/approved-additives-and-e-numbers
If it has an ingredient in it you would not use in your cooking (assuming you cook) then it is most likely ultra-processed.
A few months ago I took a local bus at 3.20 p.m. when the schoolchildren were going home. It was crowded downstairs so I went upstairs and was met with an unpleasant greasy smell. This came from several boys about 13-14 years old in the long back seat, all eating chicken nuggets and chips. It seemed that every child who got on that bus was eating some kind of junk food, including two very young ones who were handed jam doughnuts by their mother. When I got off the bus, my way was impeded by two girls who were standing near the exit door sharing a pizza. I vowed never again to catch the bus at that time of day! As others have commented, I was brought up on three simple but substantial meals a day with the occasional treat, and I wish this was still the norm.
I have an app called Yuka (there are others out there which are no doubt as good or better) but I zap the QR codes of food items if it’s something in a jar or packet. It also does shampoo and toothpaste. You don’t have to pay anything, but I chose to (it’s not much) for a better service and for the app to be able to keep going. If everyone went round with this kind of tool, a great deal of the food that is poison wouldn’t be bought. Consumers make poor choices because of lack of knowledge and an abundance of fast food outlets where I live.
Sorry, late in reading your blog today, but I am glad someone else responded to that headline in the same way. It doesn’t need any “AI” to identify those at risk of type 2 diabetes, there are well known risk factors with high prediction confidence.
My personal view is that snacking is the biggest problem, bigger than the nutritional problems of UPFs though they point in the same direction. But if you are looking for a numerical indicator, steady gain of weight surely predicts eventual t2 diabetes.
People can advocate for the Atkins diet, or full English breakfasts, or fermented foods, but in the end a balanced diet with no snacking and walking when feasible rather than taking a car is likely to be best for health.
Plus cooking from scratch if possible.
Having been diagnosed with T2D a few years and successfully recovered, the process led to a lot of research on my side. There are 3 main contributors: Too much sugar (or short-chain carbohydrates), Not enough exercise, and Too much stress. The problem is not “not enough insulin”, but more often too much, such that the body’s cells develop Insulin Resistance and don’t accept the insulin produced.
Unfortunately, as mentioned, sugars and other short-chain carbs are both too readily and cheaply available, while also highly addictive, due to the sugar rush.
In my case, I was able to counter all three contributors by switching white carbs to brown (not just less sugar, but more fibre slows the absorption of sugars), getting more exercise, and adjusting my workload.
However, if you’re working 2-3 crappy jobs on minimum pay just to make ends meet, you’re going to be shafted on all three counts. It truly is a lifestyle disease, but unfortunately, too many of us are locked into the wrong lifestyle with little prospect of escape.
Thanks
Also those who rely on food banks are unlikely to have access to healthy food or afford the fuel to cook. Youngsters that I worked with were often given bags of white rice and pasta plus jars of ready made sauces. As a treat there would be a pack of biscuits or sweets included. Rarely were fresh fruit and veg available and any meat was tinned such as corned beef, meatballs or hotdog sausages.
I agree
That is a big issue
Perhaps the reason for introducing AI is part of a strategy of reducing the scope of state support for diabetes; as government budgets shrink?
That may be appropriately cynical of you
Of interest on BBC Four and iPlayer 29, 30 and 31 December at 9pm (and on YouTube overseas) UPF critic Dr Chris van Tulleken on the revolutionary science inside our bodies when we eat
https://www.rigb.org/christmas-lectures/2024-christmas-lectures
Thanks