Here's your chance to recommend low-carb living to the nation!

I, and many others, received an email yesterday from Richard Feinman, PhD asking for help with an issue that will have an impact on us all. We have the opportuinty to share our thoughts on what low-carb guidelines should be recommended if presented to the general public. Read below to get the details:

The question bears on recommendations along the lines of the USDA meeting that is coming up. It arises from a seminar that Eric Westman gave at Downstate. The group at Downstate is not particularly doctrinaire and the talk was well received but Dr. Sheldon Landesman of the School of Public Health raised a good question: "the major focus of diets based on carbohydrate restriction are fundamentally therapeutic. How could the benefits that you presented be utilized in making recommendations to the population at large?" So while 20 g a day might be very beneficial for somebody with diabetes or somebody trying to make a big impact on weight loss, even the maintenance phase of people on low carbohydrate diets may be different than what would be recommended for everybody.


Also whereas the population at large has significant amount of overweight and obesity, a large part of the population is not overweight and even those who are, may not want to lose weight at the moment. The question is quite pressing in that the USDA has convened a panel to make new recommendations for 2010. Many of us are upset that there is no representation of the panel of people who have experience with carbohydrate restriction and some who are on the panel are probably actively antagonistic to such an approach. On the other hand, Brian Wansink the chairman of the committee is aware of the problem and open to suggestions on carbohydrate restriction.


So, the question is: how can the benefits of carbohydrate restriction that you have experienced personally or in your immediate environment be translated into reasonable recommendations that the USDA could put out? In other words, if you actually had your way what kind of recommendations would you like to see the USDA make? Recommendations should be short and to the point.


If you can encourage your readers to send their suggestions to your blog and also copy to Lauri Cagnassola (nmsoci@nmsociety.org) the Metabolism Society will organize them. We will publish the results in the scientific and popular literature and also communicate some of the main points to Brian.


I think they are right to call our bluff on what we would actually do if we had access to policy.

Best Regards,


Richard Feinman, PhD
Metabolism Society

I urge you to think on this topic and submit your suggestions and recommendations. Feel free to post them here, send them to me in an e-mail and pass them on to Lauri Cagnassola. We can make a difference if we all do our part.

You Can Make A Difference!

I received a letter today from Richard Feinman, founder of the the Nutrition and Metabolism Society. He's asking for everyone to sign a petition to make NIH take notice of existing science supporting carbohydrate restriction in treating diabetes and that they should fund more research with experts who have experience in this type of treatment. Here's the letter:

The Metabolism Society requests your assistance.
Biomedical science needs your help. The public needs your help.

Please ask your readers to sign this petition.

The NIH must acknowledge the existing science and fund more research by the experts who have experience with carbohydrate restriction as a means of treatment for diabetes.

June 12, 2008

New England Journal of Medicine published the ACCORD study results. "We investigated whether intensive therapy to target normal glycated hemoglobin levels would reduce cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes" (intensive therapy meant intensive drug therapy).

Conclusion:
"As compared with standard therapy, the use of intensive therapy to target normal glycated hemoglobin levels for 3.5 years increased mortality and did not significantly reduce major cardiovascular events. These findings identify a previously unrecognized harm of intensive glucose lowering in high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes."

An elementary understanding of science lets one recognize that it is likely the treatment (intensive drug therapy) that has the (unrecognized?) harm. A substantial background of studies shows that not reducing glycated hemoglobin is a health risk.
It is the absence of any consideration of dietary carbohydrate restriction, the most safe and effective method of improving glycemic control that is so objectionable.

Scientists are stymied. Fighting with the NIH is not simple, generally not a career builder, and the number of people involved in this trial is in the hundreds. Only the public can help. We need your help in reaching them.

Please ask your readers to contribute by signing this petition.

Thank you.


Richard Feinman
Professor of Biochemistry
Founder, Metabolism Society
www.nmsociety.org

When you sign the petition, you have the opportunity to add your own personal message for impact. Here's what I wrote:

Carbohydrate restriction has been utilized by many diabetics and has proven itself to be a fantastic method of treatment. As someone who has blood sugar issues, I want to know the TRUTH! I can't risk my health on speculation or junk science. Please give restricted carbohydrate regimens the consideration it deserves. Lives count on it!

It's very important that we make our voices heard! Please sign the petition, and pass it on to your friends so they can sign it. Together we can make a difference for so many who suffer needlessly.