BPC, breakfast, BulletProof Coffee, Cholesterol, dementia, diabetes, diet, Fat, gluten-free, Grain free, gravy, Guidelines, hormone, immune system, insulin, insulin resistant, keto, ketogenic, lifestyle, low carb, macros, Media, NAFLD, nurse, nurse practitioner, paleo, PCOS, Recipes, supplement, vitamin, vitamin D

Do you check your glucose?

For any of you who have never checked your glucose, maybe it’s worth a try. It is truly the only way to know how food directly impacts glucose.

Use a glucometer to check and monitor your glucose level. They can be purchased over the counter. For inexpensive ones, ask your local pharmacy about the least expensive to use over time. I believe Walmart has one that is fairly inexpensive; it’s the Relion meter.

I recommend testing first thing in the morning, and then after meals to determine how food impacted your glucose. Standard post-meal testing is at 2 hours. Some people, however are not textbook. I usually recommend testing after several different meals over a few different days every 30 minutes after eating to determine your personal peak… once you determine this time frame, you’ll only need to test before and after once. No need to test every single meal at first if you’re worried about costs of testing OR running out of fingers. 😉

But pick a few meals at different times of day. If costs are a factor in buying strips, it’s really important to test before and after different meals — example: test before and after breakfast on Mon, Wed, & Saturday for 2 weeks, before & after lunch on Tue, Thurs, & Fri for 1 week, and supper on Sunday, Tues, Thurs, Sun, for the 2nd week.

Once you’ve determined your personal glucose peak, you can then limit testing to before meals and around your peak.

To determine the impact of certain food on glucose level, test before and after at your personalized peak. Ideally, the readings should not be very different, but readings are allowed to be about 10 numbers diff.

Example: pre-meal is 97; post-meal highest should be about 107 for optimal glucose control.

Even non-diabetics can use meters and learn for themselves how food impacts glucose.

This is where we get the phrase, “eat to your meter.”

Testing glucose is the absolute best method for determining how foods impact your glucose. Knowing how food will affect glucose levels is very important for people on a low carb diet, especially those who take medicines to lower glucose directly. If glucose goes up more than 10 points, it’s probably not a good idea to continue eating that food.

If you’d like help learning to eat to your meter or learning how to eat low carb high fat to reduce the impact of disease on the body, please email me at ketonurses@gmail.com for more information.

Advertisements
Cholesterol, diabetes, diet, Fat, gluten-free, Grain free, Guidelines, hormone, immune system, insulin, insulin resistant, keto, ketogenic, lifestyle, low carb, macros, NAFLD, nurse, nurse practitioner, paleo, PCOS, Uncategorized, vitamin

One Person at a Time – We CAN Change the World

 

It is truly a shame that mainstream medical providers, highly trained and well-educated professionals, continue to encourage hundreds of grams of carbohydrate intake on a daily basis when simple logic shows that the approach is not helping to reduce elevated glucose, decrease weight, lower blood pressure, or improve health in any form at all. For many years, now, the nutritional guidelines have encouraged an intake of 200+ grams of carbohydrates daily, even though our bloodstream only requires 4 grams.  For a person with diabetes and insulin resistance, this advice is detrimental to health.  This recommendation contributes to significant over-eating, poor nutrient intake, and terrible internal chemical imbalance – all of which contribute to chronic metabolic conditions.

This advice does NOT differ for Type 1 diabetics, Type 2 diabetics, or for anyone with insulin resistance. Type 1 patients require insulin administration daily so they can metabolize & properly manage the carb & protein intake.  Type 2 patients often end up using insulin injections because the tablets and diet do not provide enough assistance internally to lower glucose and organ damage.  Patients with insulin resistance often require hundreds of units of insulin a day just to keep glucose levels less than 200.  (Less than 100 is NORMAL.)

Anyone with an over-the-counter glucometer can determine this simple and logical conclusion quite easily. Test glucose prior to eating; test again about 2 hours after eating.  If glucose level changes more than 10 numbers, there are likely many carbohydrates in that meal.  So, next meal, test again, leaving out those particular carbohydrates.  Determine for yourself just how to eat with minimal impact on glucose level.

Even a non-scientist understands the simple anatomy and physiological response within our bodies.

“The problem is that carbohydrates break down into glucose, which causes the body to release insulin—a hormone that is fantastically efficient at storing fat. Meanwhile, fructose, the main sugar in fruit, causes the liver to generate triglycerides and other lipids in the blood that are altogether bad news. Excessive carbohydrates lead not only to obesity but also, over time, to Type 2 diabetes and, very likely, heart disease.” – Excerpt from The Wall Street Journal, https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-questionable-link-between-saturated-fat-and-heart-disease-1399070926, retrieved 2/21/2018.

Why is testing like this necessary? Testing glucose is necessary to gain control of your own illness and health. Medical providers are trained to prescribe medications that are produced and sold to provide a source of steady income to drug companies.  Medical providers need a steady and full schedule of patients in order to provide a steady income for their staffs and themselves.  Medical providers have NO coursework in nutrition, except for a freshman or sophomore course as a pre-requisite to professional medical, nursing, or nutrition school.  There is NO training whatsoever for medical providers to learn how to incorporate nutrition as a part of therapeutic treatment for chronic metabolic conditions.  They never hear the word ketogenic nutrition; they have no idea what normal and natural ketosis is.

That said, mainstream providers do the best they can with info and training they’ve been provided; none of them actually WANT us sick or on meds. It is simply all they know.  Medical providers have guidelines and “standards of care” to which we’re held responsible.  These guidelines encourage us to prescribe certain medications as diabetes is diagnosed and then progresses. We are to obtain certain lab testing at specified intervals.  We are trained to tell patients that an A1c of 7 or less is “NORMAL for a diabetic.”  We are trained to use these guidelines as our “logic” and reasoning, even though very little of the guidelines has any actual research supporting the use; most of the research quoted has been debunked many times over the past 5-8 years by independent experts without financial interest in the outcomes.

Why do our trusted and trained medical providers offer such flawed advice? It goes back 50-70 years.  It started in the 1950s when President Eisenhower suffered a heart attack while in office.  Some strong personalities were already studying and researching diet and the impacts of diet on health.  Ancel Keys is credited with starting this avalanche of low fat diet advice, but others quickly hopped on his bandwagon.  The often-quoted and cited Framingham Study also released only part of the data collected and was used as “evidence” that saturated fats caused high cholesterol which caused deadly heart disease. However, Dr. William Castelli, a former director of the Framingham Heart study, stated in a 1992 editorial published in the Archives of Internal Medicine:

In Framingham, Mass., the more saturated fat one ate, the more cholesterol one ate, the more calories one ate, the lower the person’s serum cholesterol. The opposite of what… Keys et al would predict…We found that the people who ate the most cholesterol, ate the most saturated fat, ate the most calories, weighed the least and were the most physically active.”

This major piece of data was NOT released as part of the study; it only came out later as part of the editorial by the former director of the study. By 1980, so much money and time had been invested in low-fat dietary research, it seemed no one could stop it. Thus, the “Standard Dietary Guidelines for Americans” was published. Later, the American Heart Association also joined in the support of these guidelines; the American Diabetes Association also began to support these guidelines.  No science.  No independent research data. Thus, we the people were “fleeced” and fell right in line with this dietary advice.  We began cutting fats and one of the first fats to go was milkfat, and then animal fats.

milkfat pic          animal fat pic

However, look at what happened to the weight of Americans.

 

Multiple resources offer similar trends in weight; notice the trend of weight gain began during the 1970s and 80s, when low-fat dietary advice was pushed forward as “healthy.”

disease trends

Using some simple common sense and logic, we can review history and data and draw some logical conclusions based on these numbers. As fat intake declined, obesity and heart disease rates increased.  What replaced the fat?

carb intake

474 grams of carbohydrates will be converted into 118 TEASPOONS of glucose – that’s 2.5 CUPS of sugar. Just what do medical experts EXPECT our bodies to do with this much glucose?

Even at the lowest ADA recommended intake of 165 grams of carbs per day, those carbs convert into nearly 7 ounces of glucose – almost 1 whole cup of glucose.

Think about our most vulnerable of our population: our children. Then, narrow down that population to Type 1 children. Current recommendations for managing this illness is to eat high amounts of carbohydrates and to administer higher and higher amounts of insulin to lower the glucose load.  How does this advice even seem normal, now that we’ve seen the data? Do their brains develop normally with such significantly elevated glucose levels? Some experts are calling Alzheimer disease Type 3 diabetes because we now recognize the brain damage done by high glucose and high insulin levels – yet, it’s the “standard” treatment for our most vulnerable population?  Why would we actually WANT our children to consume hundreds of grams of carbohydrates daily, just to be able to dose higher amounts of insulin? Why should we continue to advise high carb intake when it has now been linked to higher rates of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, infertility, and even cancer – even in our children? I fail to see the logic.  Our children deserve better.  Our children deserve NORMAL glucose levels.  They should not be at risk for developing “double diabetes,” because we continue to encourage high carb intake and high insulin use, forcing their bodies to become insulin resistant over time.  These children are one of our most valuable resources; why can’t we provide better advice and care?

One person at a time. One medical provider at a time.  One conversation at a time, we are taking charge of our own health.  We are doing the “research” by checking our own glucose.  We track our intake.  We, at the grassroots level, are doing research that government and agencies and companies should have done half a century ago.  We are cutting out the highly inflammatory grains.  We are cutting out sugar.  We are eliminating the cause of our metabolic disease, and our health improves because we are PRO-active instead of reactive.  We are using food as our medicine…. Isn’t that what Hippocrates said?  “Let food be thy medicine and medicine be thy food.”  And our medical physicians take the Hippocratic oath, which includes the phrase, “do no harm.”  I think it’s time we hold our providers accountable for their advice.  What do YOU think?

breakfast, Cholesterol, diabetes, diet, Fat, gluten-free, Grain free, Guidelines, hormone, immune system, insulin, insulin resistant, keto, ketogenic, lifestyle, low carb, NAFLD, nurse, nurse practitioner, paleo, PCOS, supplement, Uncategorized, vitamin

Measures of “Improving Health”

Recently, another health care provider mocked my use of the phrase, “improving the health of my patients”, saying that it’s vague and not measurable.
Her comments gave me pause, because the goal of every nurse I’ve ever met has been to help people improve their health. Ask any nurse why he or she became a nurse, and you will hear a variety of ways people say it. We nurses help people get well, better, or over a health obstacle. How is that measured?
First and foremost, there are many parameters used by health care providers to measure health. With diagnoses of diabetes and hypertension, we measure glucose and blood pressure, respectively. But we often have difficulty quantifying how people feel when they lower their glucose or blood pressure. When patients return for follow-up and I’m able to tell them their hemoglobin A1c dropped from 8.9 to 6.4 after weeks of diet changes and effort, people are thrilled. They grin from ear to ear. They clap. They shake a fist in the air. They “high five” me. Some even do a “happy dance.” What is measurable here? Yes, the glucose levels are numerical and easy to track. But how does anyone put a scale on happiness or joyfulness? Can the idea that diabetic complications no longer pose a looming hazard to health be measured? How is relief quantified when kidney damage has improved?


These feelings are not measurable, yet they are extremely evident in behaviors and attitude. Patients who work toward improving health exhibit gratefulness that good instruction is provided; is that gratitude measurable?
Measures are important in health care. Measurements of pulse or blood pressure provide vital information to us who render the care. I decided that some of you might be interested in knowing what measures we use for certain conditions so you can track your own progress over time.
With diabetes, one of the most important measures is glucose, of course; in addition, the hemoglobin A1c that tells us the average glucose levels over the past 90-100 days provides a good correlation to patient effort in managing the condition. While mainstream medicine will say that “good” diabetes control occurs when the A1c is around 7, many studies have shown that diabetic complications occur when the A1c runs higher than about 6.2 or so. Normal A1c levels run around 5 or less; why should people diagnosed with diabetes be forced to run glucose levels so high that we KNOW organ damage will occur? Is that going to help patients “improve their health”?
Elevated blood pressure is often associated with diabetes because high glucose levels cause thick, sticky blood; demanding that the heart pump thick, sticky blood to an overweight body will eventually result in high blood pressure. The heart will pump harder and with more force to move thick “syrupy” blood through tiny blood vessels, resulting in higher and higher blood pressure readings. When blood pressure increases, the heart muscle becomes compromised and weaker. Daily demands on the heart that continually exceed it’s designed capabilities can contribute to a multitude of vague symptoms which are not measurable, including headaches, fatigue, nausea, dizziness, or even mild swelling. While most of these symptoms have no quantifiable scale, patients will describe how much better they feel once blood pressure is lowered. While blood pressure is measurable, the feeling of lower and healthier blood pressure is described by patients as “improved health.”
If blood pressure remains untreated or poorly managed, heart failure and/or kidney damage begin to occur. Highly pressurized blood flow moving through the kidneys will damage the fragile vessels, reducing the filtering ability of the kidneys. Elevated glucose can also damage these tiny vessels, resulting in inflammatory responses by the body that are designed to patch and repair damage – but this natural response by the body can result in blood vessel blockages. Think scar tissue.

In this photo below, notice that cholesterol is serving as the patch, relating the damage to the blood vessel. Cholesterol isNOT the cause of clots; it’s part of the damage control/repair team of the body. In summary, how do we measure “improved health”? How can we quantify patient comments when they express gratitude for how they feel? How can we count the number of clinic visits these patients will NOT have? How do we track hospitalizations that do NOT occur for these patients? What evidence do we see when ER visits are no longer the norm for people with “normal” glucose or blood pressure? We can’t. But these numbers ARE real. These people ARE changing their lives and IMPROVING HEALTH!

If you want to take charge of YOUR health, email us for more info at KetoNurses@gmail.com

Cholesterol, diabetes, diet, Fat, Guidelines, immune system, insulin resistant, keto, ketogenic, lifestyle, low carb, NAFLD, nurse, nurse practitioner, paleo, PCOS

Where did the low-fat dogma originate?

So, what started the low-fat craze?  Having been in graduate school to become a family nurse practitioner, we learned to follow the “guidelines” about cholesterol. If a patient comes to us with high cholesterol, we are to implement “lifestyle” interventions. We were told to institute a low fat diet and prescribe statins (cholesterol lowering medications) if the low-fat diet didn’t work (which, of course, it DOESN’T work!)

However, there was never a mention of Ancel Keys.  We were not told the history behind the nutritional guidelines.  In fact, we were to read the government’s  Healthy People goals and told to utilize them in our work.  In retrospect, instead of critically thinking, it was almost as if we were being indoctrinated to a dogma and one with an unproven hypothesis!

It wasn’t until I became a practicing Family Nurse Practitioner that I realized low-fat diets and medication were not the answer.  In fact, I found medications actually caused more side effects and some patients felt that since they were taking cholesterol-lowering medications, they could eat whatever they wanted!

The low-fat diet is unpalatable and low-fat products are loaded with carbohydrates.  Thus, many who attempted to follow this failed miserably.  In addition, with the added carbohydrates, they gained MORE weight, became type II diabetic, and suffered with metabolic syndrome that leads to heart disease!

I found many of my patients to have an increase in their blood sugar, muscle aches and memory loss from statin medications.  This was a catalyst for me to delve into research.  I was not comfortable mindlessly “following the guidelines”.  I became interested in ketogenic nutrition and started to follow this way of eating.  I felt 100% better, had more energy, found that my arthritis did not flare and lost 40 pounds!  My lipid levels are wonderful.

I investigated the beginning of the low-fat craze to find a researcher named Ancel Keys.  He became convinced that Americans were suffering from heart disease from eating too much saturated fat.  He developed the hypothesis (which is an UNPROVEN idea) that saturated fat causes heart disease. He was totally WRONG, as you shall see.

Scientists who suffered at the hands of Ancel Keys…

E.H. Peter Ahrens of Rockefeller University in New York City was an expert lipidologist.  He was known for being very meticulous in his research.  During this time in history, the 50’s, most scientists were concerned with serum cholesterol.  Ahrens tried to open dialogue to point out that cholesterol was not the end-point in heart disease and he suggested that carbohydrates might be contributing to obesity, diabetes and heart disease.  Ahrens predicted the low-fat diet would lead to unintended and very unhealthy consequences. He was absolutely correct!

Ahrens focused on triglycerides (molecules made of fatty acids circulating in the blood).  He performed experiments to separate out triglycerides from the blood from 1951 to 1964.  In each of these clinical studies, when carbohydrates replaced fats in the diet, triglycerides consistently rose.  He worked with a physician at Yale University and compared the triglyceride and cholesterol levels of heart patients.  They found high triglyceride to be far more common in heart patients than high total cholesterol.  Several researchers confirmed this over the next decade.  However, it fell on deaf ears.  He continued to caution his colleagues on the dangers of carbohydrates.

Keys was known as a scientific bully, arrogant and relentless in disparaging any scientist who opposed his ideas.  George Mann, a Vanderbilt biochemist, and associate director of the Framingham Heart Study, was a prominent scientist ridiculed by Keys.  Mann studied the Massai in Africa whose total cholesterol levels were among the lowest in the world.  Mann noticed the diet of the Massai people to be high in fat, yet they did not suffer from obesity, diabetes or heart disease.  Keys dismissed this study and commented that the “peculiarities of those primitive nomads have no relevance”.

After Mann spoke out against Keys’ diet-heart hypothesis, his career took a devastating turn. He was barred from the American Heart Association publications, journals would not publish his work, and research grants were canceled. He is one of MANY who suffered from speaking out against Keys’ flawed research.

Mann admitted that the Framingham Heart Study ultimately concluded that the more saturated fat a person ate, the lower their cholesterol and weight. Moreover, 50% of the patients who had heart attacks had cholesterol levels BELOW normal.

A generation of research on the diet-heart question has ended in disarray….a misguided and fruitless preoccupation—George Mann

The American Heart Association and the National Institute of Health accepted Keys’ hypothesis and gave it strength.  Researchers who questioned it were barred from membership to the AHA, lost research funding and suffered career setbacks. Yet, this very hypothesis is just that—an unproven idea.

The Seven Countries Study

In 1956, Keys embarked on his study.  He wanted to show that a diet high in cholesterol resulted in cardiac disease.  Keys cherry-picked his data and excluded countries that did not fit his idea.Keys claimed his study revealed that heart disease was highest in countries where fat consumption was highest.  Keys purposefully left out countries where people eat a lot of fat, but have very little heart disease, such as Holland and Norway.  He left out Chile, which showed fat consumption is LOW, but heart disease is HIGH.  This highly flawed study gained enormous media attention and had a major influence on the diet of all Americans…to their detriment.

George McGovern

In order to reverse the epidemic of heart disease, a 1977 committee, led by the U.S. Senator George McGovern, instituted the first dietary goals for the country. McGovern, without any medical education, chose to focus on the research of Ancel Keys. The low-fat dogma began. These guidelines received massive criticism by many respected scientists.  The American Medical Association was against them as were many scientific professionals. Americans were told to eat less fat and more complex carbohydrates.  The guidelines were chosen by the United States Department of Agriculture.  How interesting as they are in the business of selling grains.

American Heart Association

The American Heart Association (AHA) was founded in 1924.  It started out as an underfunded organization.  Proctor and Gamble, in 1948, offered to give the association all their funds from the radio show Truth or Consequences.  This opened up vast avenues for publicity and research.  They eventually hired a Bible salesman who devised a very successful fund-raising campaign.  By 1960, the AHA attained esteemed status in the media and medical community and invested millions of dollars in research.  At this point, they did not agree with Keys’ low fat recommendation.

Manipulated…

By 1961, Keys and his colleague, Jeremiah Stamler, a physician from Chicago, joined the U.S. Nutrition committee.  Neither one had any training in nutrition, epidemiology or cardiology.  However, Keys was a master of persuasion and managed to persuade the AHA that the diet-heart hypothesis about cholesterol intake should be center stage.  The AHA adopted this hypothesis and suggested Americans cut their intake of saturated fat and cholesterol.  They advocated polyunsaturated fats, such as soybean and corn oil (so inflammatory, as we know now!)

Discredited studies…

Unfortunately, money talks. Studies illustrating NO causation between heart disease and saturated fat were available, but the food and drug industry has ways to keep these studies from the public. Many studies have been conducted that clearly illustrate NO association between intake of saturated fat and heart disease.  For instance, William Zukel, a researcher, headed to North Dakota to examine patients who suffered a heart attack.  He identified 228 cases with detailed diet and lifestyle data.  He found that smoking was a factor, but could not associate intake of saturated fat with heart disease.

An Irish study examined 100 men under the age of sixty who had a heart attack.  They did a detailed account of diet.  There was NO association between intake of saturated fat and heart disease.

F.W. Lowenstein, in 1964, as medical officer for the World Health Organization, obtained every study about men who were free of heart disease.  He found NO correlation between intake of saturated fat and heart disease.

Credible scientific journals published the above.  However, those who support the Keys’ hypothesis always found a way to discredit these research studies. This continues today.  The pharmaceutical and food industries do not want us to find the truth.

Keys’ research has been discredited.  We are now seeing the result of years of Americans living the low-fat mantra and suffering with type II diabetes, obesity and heart disease.  We can help you change this—one day at a time.

I highly recommend Nina Teicholz’ book, The Big Fat Surprise.  It is well-researched and will give you an extensive background to the corruption in the research that has led us to an epidemic of obesity, type II diabetes and heart disease.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask us!

I want to add a link to a study. Read the “conclusion”. It clearly states there is no association between eating saturated fat and heart disease! What the researchers DO state is that what is used to REPLACE fat in low-fat products may be the culprit. All low-fat products ADD carbohydrates to make the food taste better.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2010/01/13/ajcn.2009.27725.abstract

 

Cholesterol, diet, Fat, Grain free, Guidelines, insulin, insulin resistant, keto, ketogenic, lifestyle, low carb, macros, nurse, nurse practitioner, paleo

Our Beginnings…

Jenni Gallagher
Jenni Gallagher

About 5 years ago, I attended a workshop led by a doctor of osteopathy, or DO, who had been in family practice for years.  Over the years, his practice became mostly one dealing with very high risk patients, like those with heart attacks, strokes, obesity, poorly controlled diabetes, and hypertension.  During his presentation, he relayed a story about a phone call from that state’s largest insurer who was frustrated that he was ordering some of the most expensive diagnostic tests on every single patient in his practice, but amazed that none of his patients EVER had to be admitted for interventional procedures, like balloons or stints, or for diagnoses like heart attacks or strokes.  THOSE statistics completely blew me away, and I immediately began cutting back on some processed foods.  He’d described the diet information that he used to help patients improve their health, and I began to make some of those same changes.

I developed a “diet sheet” that I started using with my patients, and started helping them reduce some processed foods, breads, cereals, and sodas.  Over several months, many of these patients improved many markers of health, including their hemoglobin A1c, which is an index that we can use to determine the average blood glucose over the previous 90 days.

A normal A1c is less than 5 or 5.5, depending on which expert author you are reading today; an A1c of 5 tells us that the average blood glucose level over the previous 90 days is about 97.  That level is good because it means that high readings of glucose are not likely, and the pancreas is able to pump out plenty of insulin to help manage the glucose consumed in the daily diet.

When diabetes was first recognized, some researchers found that ants were attracted to the urine and feces of people stricken with this illness.  Therefore, it became known as an illness of urination and termed diabetes, which means siphon.  Later, the word mellitus was added as it means honey; diabetes mellitus was recognized to be an illness of diet and many strange attempts were made at treatment, including the “oat diet”, “potato therapy”, and a “starvation diet”.

In the 1920s, a Canadian physician began treating diabetes with a variety of medications and finally was successful with insulin; he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Medicine in 1922.  While they still had no idea about the actual pathways of illness that caused diabetes, pieces of the puzzle were coming together.  Over the past 100 years, diabetes has been one of the most common ailments studied; billions of health care research dollars have been used seeking causes, treatments, and medications to control it.

With all of the early evidence that there were problems with sugars – I mean, even ants were attracted to the waste products of humans afflicted with diabetes – it should have been an easy connection to a low intake of sugar in order to treat or manage the condition. To date, however, all of the dietary advice since the 1950s has used a low fat diet to treat diabetes.

However, over the past 10 years or so, many diabetes experts have begun to question the status quo; physicians, nurse practitioners, and nutritionists have begun using low carbohydrate diet plans to reduce blood glucose levels.  Dr. Eric Westman, at Duke University has been one of the most outspoken advocates of low carb eating.  Although he has published many research articles that support his dietary concepts, this method of eating has yet to be accepted by mainstream medicine.  Many others have produced YouTube Videos, blog articles, and even peer-reviewed professional journal articles, albeit small and less recognized arenas.

Part of the reason for the little fame for the low carb diet goes all the way back to the 1950s when the strong and overreaching personality of Ancel Keys forced opposing viewpoints to the low fat mantra back into the shadows.  He didn’t want any loud opposition to low fat guidelines, and during his next 30 years, he contributed to the loss of jobs of many researchers and experts; he also saw to it that some of his opponents lost research grant money, thus ending their careers.  That mentality continues today, mostly because all of healthcare agencies and the organizations that set our guidelines are all friends, colleagues, and co-researchers who are dependent on the government and organizations who provide funding for the research.  Yes, I know it sounds like a giant conspiracy theory, and in a way,  it is.  However, I truly don’t believe it started out this way.  I like to think that original founders and researchers had America’s best interests at heart.  It was only when government and big pharmaceutical companies went to bed with the food industry that untoward consequences made their way into the lives of regular Americans as disease, obesity, and poor health.

When Ancel Keys was offered a position on an early national nutrition committee, no one could have ever imagined the horrible effects that were to occur over the next 30 years.  While he really wanted to identify a major cause of heart disease, his research methods have since been called into question.  Much of his work has been called fraudulent and unethical, as research findings were released only in support of his opinion.  During recent years and with the advent of the internet and spread of information, more opposition has built against Ancel Keys’ work and a grass-roots effort to change the Standard American Diet (SAD) are occurring in towns and cities all across America.  Even the American Diabetic Association (ADA) recently came out in support of using a low carbohydrate diet as part of the management of diabetes.  Although the ADA hasn’t provided any guidance as to what constitutes a low carb diet, many patients and health care providers are figuring it out on their own.

Blogs, books, infomercials and YouTube videos touting the benefits and “rules” of low carb eating are springing up everywhere; Paleo, Ketogenics, Whole 30, and many other variations of low carb are quite popular on Facebook, Twitter, and other social media.  Patients around the world are taking control of their diabetes and their own health like never before in our nation’s history.

I believe it is time for health care professionals, especially NURSES, to take a stand and speak up for patients; as nurses, some of our most respected qualities are honesty and advocacy.  The goal of this blog is to provide open and honest information with the most current research on diet and nutrition to you, our families, friends, and most of all to our patients so that you can reverse illness, improve health, and enjoy a much longer and happier life.