Explore the vast range of titles available.

Living with diabetes doesn't have to mean giving up all of your favorite foods. Carbs from healthy foods boost nutrition and supply essential fuel for your brain and body. Counting carbs is integral to managing diabetes because your carb choices, portion sizes, and meal timing directly impact blood glucose levels. Diabetes & Carb Counting For Dummies provides essential information on how to strike a balance between carb intake, exercise, and diabetes medications while making healthy food choices.

There is an error in the caption for Fig 2, “Binding of His6-EF-Tu to sulfated glycolipids assessed by SPR analysis.” The KD value is described in the text. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174257.g001 1.

Dr. David Perlmutter's groundbreaking bestseller Grain Brain revolutionized the way we think about our health, exposing the devastating effects of wheat, sugar, and carbs on the brain and empowering us with new knowledge: by eating the right foods, you can profoundly affect how your brain will be working next year, in five years, and for the rest of your life. The Grain Brain Cookbook equips you to do just that, presenting more than 150 delectable recipes to keep your brain vibrant and your body fit, all while dramatically reducing your risk for, and treating Alzheimer's, depression, ADHD, and epilepsy, as well as relieving more common, everyday conditions like chronic headaches, insomnia, anxiety, and \"senior moments\" of forgetfulness. The meals in this book are wholesome, easy to prepare, and best of all, delicious to eat, making your transition to a gluten free life seamless, satisfying, and stress free in the kitchen.

In the past, different types of diet with a generally low-carbohydrate content (< 50–< 20 g/day) have been promoted, for weight loss and diabetes, and the effectiveness of a very low dietary carbohydrate content has always been a matter of debate. A significant reduction in the amount of carbohydrates in the diet is usually accompanied by an increase in the amount of fat and to a lesser extent, also protein. Accordingly, using the term “low carb–high fat” (LCHF) diet is most appropriate. Low/very low intakes of carbohydrate food sources may impact on overall diet quality and long-term effects of such drastic diet changes remain at present unknown. This narrative review highlights recent metabolic and clinical outcomes of studies as well as practical feasibility of low LCHF diets. A few relevant observations are as follows: (1) any diet type resulting in reduced energy intake will result in weight loss and related favorable metabolic and functional changes; (2) short-term LCHF studies show both favorable and less desirable effects; (3) sustained adherence to a ketogenic LCHF diet appears to be difficult. A non-ketogenic diet supplying 100–150 g carbohydrate/day, under good control, may be more practical. (4) There is lack of data supporting long-term efficacy, safety and health benefits of LCHF diets. Any recommendation should be judged in this light. (5) Lifestyle intervention in people at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes, while maintaining a relative carbohydrate-rich diet, results in long-term prevention of progression to type 2 diabetes and is generally seen as safe.

AbstractObjectiveTo determine the efficacy and safety of low carbohydrate diets (LCDs) and very low carbohydrate diets (VLCDs) for people with type 2 diabetes.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesSearches of CENTRAL, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, CAB, and grey literature sources from inception to 25 August 2020.Study selectionRandomized clinical trials evaluating LCDs (<130 g/day or <26% of a 2000 kcal/day diet) and VLCDs (<10% calories from carbohydrates) for at least 12 weeks in adults with type 2 diabetes were eligible.Data extractionPrimary outcomes were remission of diabetes (HbA1c <6.5% or fasting glucose <7.0 mmol/L, with or without the use of diabetes medication), weight loss, HbA1c, fasting glucose, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included health related quality of life and biochemical laboratory data. All articles and outcomes were independently screened, extracted, and assessed for risk of bias and GRADE certainty of evidence at six and 12 month follow-up. Risk estimates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using random effects meta-analysis. Outcomes were assessed according to a priori determined minimal important differences to determine clinical importance, and heterogeneity was investigated on the basis of risk of bias and seven a priori subgroups. Any subgroup effects with a statistically significant test of interaction were subjected to a five point credibility checklist.ResultsSearches identified 14 759 citations yielding 23 trials (1357 participants), and 40.6% of outcomes were judged to be at low risk of bias. At six months, compared with control diets, LCDs achieved higher rates of diabetes remission (defined as HbA1c <6.5%) (76/133 (57%) v 41/131 (31%); risk difference 0.32, 95% confidence interval 0.17 to 0.47; 8 studies, n=264, I2=58%). Conversely, smaller, non-significant effect sizes occurred when a remission definition of HbA1c <6.5% without medication was used. Subgroup assessments determined as meeting credibility criteria indicated that remission with LCDs markedly decreased in studies that included patients using insulin. At 12 months, data on remission were sparse, ranging from a small effect to a trivial increased risk of diabetes. Large clinically important improvements were seen in weight loss, triglycerides, and insulin sensitivity at six months, which diminished at 12 months. On the basis of subgroup assessments deemed credible, VLCDs were less effective than less restrictive LCDs for weight loss at six months. However, this effect was explained by diet adherence. That is, among highly adherent patients on VLCDs, a clinically important reduction in weight was seen compared with studies with less adherent patients on VLCDs. Participants experienced no significant difference in quality of life at six months but did experience clinically important, but not statistically significant, worsening of quality of life and low density lipoprotein cholesterol at 12 months. Otherwise, no significant or clinically important between group differences were found in terms of adverse events or blood lipids at six and 12 months.ConclusionsOn the basis of moderate to low certainty evidence, patients adhering to an LCD for six months may experience remission of diabetes without adverse consequences. Limitations include continued debate around what constitutes remission of diabetes, as well as the efficacy, safety, and dietary satisfaction of longer term LCDs.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020161795.

The inability of current recommendations to control the epidemic of diabetes, the specific failure of the prevailing low-fat diets to improve obesity, cardiovascular risk, or general health and the persistent reports of some serious side effects of commonly prescribed diabetic medications, in combination with the continued success of low-carbohydrate diets in the treatment of diabetes and metabolic syndrome without significant side effects, point to the need for a reappraisal of dietary guidelines. The benefits of carbohydrate restriction in diabetes are immediate and well documented. Concerns about the efficacy and safety are long term and conjectural rather than data driven. Dietary carbohydrate restriction reliably reduces high blood glucose, does not require weight loss (although is still best for weight loss), and leads to the reduction or elimination of medication. It has never shown side effects comparable with those seen in many drugs. Here we present 12 points of evidence supporting the use of low-carbohydrate diets as the first approach to treating type 2 diabetes and as the most effective adjunct to pharmacology in type 1. They represent the best-documented, least controversial results. The insistence on long-term randomized controlled trials as the only kind of data that will be accepted is without precedent in science. The seriousness of diabetes requires that we evaluate all of the evidence that is available. The 12 points are sufficiently compelling that we feel that the burden of proof rests with those who are opposed. •We present major evidence for low-carbohydrate diets as first approach for diabetes.•Such diets reliably reduce high blood glucose, the most salient feature of diabetes.•Benefits do not require weight loss although nothing is better for weight reduction.•Carbohydrate-restricted diets reduce or eliminate need for medication.•There are no side effects comparable with those seen in intensive pharmacologic treatment. [Display omitted]

There has been much concern regarding the role of dietary fructose in the development of metabolic diseases. This concern arises from the continuous increase in fructose (and total added caloric sweeteners consumption) in recent decades, and from the increased use of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) as a sweetener. A large body of evidence shows that a high-fructose diet leads to the development of obesity, diabetes, and dyslipidemia in rodents. In humans, fructose has long been known to increase plasma triglyceride concentrations. In addition, when ingested in large amounts as part of a hypercaloric diet, it can cause hepatic insulin resistance, increased total and visceral fat mass, and accumulation of ectopic fat in the liver and skeletal muscle. These early effects may be instrumental in causing, in the long run, the development of the metabolic syndrome. There is however only limited evidence that fructose per se, when consumed in moderate amounts, has deleterious effects. Several effects of a high-fructose diet in humans can be observed with high-fat or high-glucose diets as well, suggesting that an excess caloric intake may be the main factor involved in the development of the metabolic syndrome. The major source of fructose in our diet is with sweetened beverages (and with other products in which caloric sweeteners have been added). The progressive replacement of sucrose by HFCS is however unlikely to be directly involved in the epidemy of metabolic disease, because HFCS appears to have basically the same metabolic effects as sucrose. Consumption of sweetened beverages is however clearly associated with excess calorie intake, and an increased risk of diabetes and cardiovascular diseases through an increase in body weight. This has led to the recommendation to limit the daily intake of sugar calories.

In the 1940s, the diet-heart hypothesis proposed that high dietary saturated fat and cholesterol intake promoted coronary heart disease in “at-risk” individuals. This hypothesis prompted federal recommendations for a low-fat diet for “high risk” patients and as a preventive health measure for everyone except infants. The low carbohydrate diet, first used to treat type 1 diabetes, became a popular obesity therapy with the Atkins diet in the 1970s. Its predicted effectiveness was based largely on the hypothesis that insulin is the causa prima of weight gain and regain via hyperphagia and hypometabolism during and after weight reduction, and therefore reduced carbohydrate intake would promote and sustain weight loss. Based on literature reviews, there are insufficient randomized controlled inpatient studies examining the physiological significance of the mechanisms proposed to support one over the other. Outpatient studies can be confounded by poor diet compliance such that the quality and quantity of the energy intake cannot be ascertained. Many studies also fail to separate macronutrient quantity from quality. Overall, there is no conclusive evidence that the degree of weight loss or the duration of reduced weight maintenance are significantly affected by dietary macronutrient quantity beyond effects attributable to caloric intake. Further work is needed.

Around 80% of individuals with Type 1 diabetes (T1D) in the United States do not achieve glycaemic targets and the prevalence of comorbidities suggests that novel therapeutic strategies, including lifestyle modification, are needed. Current nutrition guidelines suggest a flexible approach to carbohydrate intake matched with intensive insulin therapy. These guidelines are designed to facilitate greater freedom around nutritional choices but they may lead to higher caloric intakes and potentially unhealthy eating patterns that are contributing to the high prevalence of obesity and metabolic syndrome in people with T1D. Low carbohydrate diets (LCD; <130 g/day) may represent a means to improve glycaemic control and metabolic health in people with T1D. Regular recreational exercise or achieving a high level of athletic performance is important for many living with T1D. Research conducted on people without T1D suggests that training with reduced carbohydrate availability (often termed “train low”) enhances metabolic adaptation compared to training with normal or high carbohydrate availability. However, these “train low” practices have not been tested in athletes with T1D. This review aims to investigate the known pros and cons of LCDs as a potentially effective, achievable, and safe therapy to improve glycaemic control and metabolic health in people with T1D. Secondly, we discuss the potential for low, restricted, or periodised carbohydrate diets in athletes with T1D.