Eat Well Plate, is it bad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ralph-YK

Much missed Member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 2
The Food Programme (12:30pm, today (Sun 1 July) BBC Radio 4.) will be discussing whether "the Govenments eat well plate advice is doing harm". According to the trailer.
 
The Food Programme (12:30pm, today (Sun 1 July) BBC Radio 4.) will be discussing whether "the Govenments eat well plate advice is doing harm". According to the trailer.
I think I'll listen to that Ralph...good tip...thank you.
 
Listening to this now @Ralph-YK ….fascinating comments on the eat well plate from HCP's.
 
They were doing quite well until towards the end and the 'information' that the brain needs glucose was once again confused with the need for carbohydrate in the diet - perhaps deliberately in order to confuse - who knows - it is totted out over and over, but this was from someone influential in the advice given to the NHS and people in general.
 
Its utter C--- what you can buy at the supermarket. Sugar with extra Sugar ? Some peoples trollies would kill ?
 
There was comments about "reversing". Someone said they no longer have diabetes. *sighs* This is an area when the conversation can easily go down hill when trying is discus the value of various treatments.

I've to listen it properly yet as I was doing something else when it was live. From what I got they said the generally healthy living advice/eat well plate doesn't include any comments of what diabetics need to do. That's my issue with it. There's no management of carbs ether, you just get to eat loads.
 
I think this is the thing that has always struck me. The eatwell plate may not be bad for people with a fully functioning metabolism and/or who are not genetically predisposed to diabetes - but for those with diabetes or who are in the process of moving in that direction it can be a recipe for disaster.

It’s slightly better in proportions than it has been in the past - you may be able to ‘get away with it’ if using basal:bolus insulin, but if diet+activity is your primary BG management tool, then the proportions of eatwell seem less than ideal.
 
I haven’t listened to it, but I’ve always tried to be sensible. I know I need to give my children a healthy diet, but shouldn’t everyone follow such a diet?
 
I listened to it having a shave and a shower. I agree with Ralph, the people who spoke about “reversing” their diabetes went uncorrected or unchallenged, which is a tad sloppy.

Otherwise, I thought it was a pretty effective demolition of the Eat Well plate, but I wonder if that might leave muggles confused as to what they are supposed to eat. There’s more of them than us.
 
reversing diabetes again. I wish they would stop saying that. I personally don't think the eat well plate is good for anyone. I know people who are diabetic who have genetic predisposition but others who do not. There is nothing wrong with the right kind of carbs but I think the modern diet is too overloaded with them and overload of anything would not, in my view, be a good thing long-term.
 
I've just started a X-Pert diabetes course run by our local CCG.

On version 12 of the course, there is a modified Eatwell plate, with the usual third Fruit & Veg / sixth Protein / sixth Milk & Dairy
and the remaining third split between Fats / Carbs according to whether you follow Low Fat or Low Carb regime.
 
I've just started a X-Pert diabetes course run by our local CCG.

On version 12 of the course, there is a modified Eatwell plate, with the usual third Fruit & Veg / sixth Protein / sixth Milk & Dairy
and the remaining third split between Fats / Carbs according to whether you follow Low Fat or Low Carb regime.
The ones I've seen have always had a protein section, (which might have included pulses & beans, along with meat etc) that was bigger than the fats section & smaller than the veg and carb sections.
 
I think this is the thing that has always struck me. The eatwell plate may not be bad for people with a fully functioning metabolism and/or who are not genetically predisposed to diabetes - but for those with diabetes or who are in the process of moving in that direction it can be a recipe for disaster.

It’s slightly better in proportions than it has been in the past - you may be able to ‘get away with it’ if using basal:bolus insulin, but if diet+activity is your primary BG management tool, then the proportions of eatwell seem less than ideal.
Perhaps you could tell us why DUK do not recognise that?...or would this be a question for @Hannah DUK ...my understanding is that DUK while now recognising (finally) that the low carb is the right approach still advocate low carb/low fat...we know of course that most/many low fat products & foodstuffs have sugar & other flavour enhancers added to improve the flavour when the fat is removed...which of course means more carbs...it doesn't make any sense at all.
 
would this be a question for @Hannah DUK ....

Yes 🙂

Diabetes UK advocate for a range of different approaches to healthy eating for diabetes, and for people to find what works best for them. This could be low carb, Mediterranean, and many more. The important thing is that it fits into your lifestyle and is tailored to your needs. What works for one person, may not definitively work for another, so we support individuals in taking different approaches that they find to be beneficial for their own diabetes.
 
That's interesting Bamba. I've never seen any with a processed food section/note. Sometimes people would stick all the processed/takeaways/rubbish (the facilitator used blunter words) into the fats section.
 
Yes 🙂

Diabetes UK advocate for a range of different approaches to healthy eating for diabetes, and for people to find what works best for them. This could be low carb, Mediterranean, and many more. The important thing is that it fits into your lifestyle and is tailored to your needs. What works for one person, may not definitively work for another, so we support individuals in taking different approaches that they find to be beneficial for their own diabetes.
I'm afraid I find Diabetes UK a bit lacking here. You don't necessarily need to go all out for low card.
You could go for firmer language for managing carbohydrates. You can do this while supporting individuals finding which type of carbs and quantities work for them.
 
Yes 🙂

Diabetes UK advocate for a range of different approaches to healthy eating for diabetes, and for people to find what works best for them. This could be low carb, Mediterranean, and many more. The important thing is that it fits into your lifestyle and is tailored to your needs. What works for one person, may not definitively work for another, so we support individuals in taking different approaches that they find to be beneficial for their own diabetes.
The recent recommendation for the low carb approach has (as I understand it) been the first major change in dietary advice from DUK since 2011...I'm wondering how they reconcile recommending a low carb diet and combining it with low fat...low fat foods have a significantly higher carbohydrate content than full fat foods on the products/foodstuffs I have compared...surely that completely negates the low carb advice/recommendation call it what you will?
 
I'm afraid I find Diabetes UK a bit lacking here. You don't necessarily need to go all out for low card.
You could go for firmer language for managing carbohydrates. You can do this while supporting individuals finding which type of carbs and quantities work for them.
Good point Ralph.
 
That's interesting Bamba. I've never seen any with a processed food section/note. Sometimes people would stick all the processed/takeaways/rubbish (the facilitator used blunter words) into the fats section.
Apparently there used to be a separate wedge for "Processed Foods" - it was removed and placed in the middle as the portion allocation seemed to suggest that
people HAD to eat that amount of processed food.

The Carbs / Fat being lumped together enable Low Fat / Mediteranean / Low Carb to be offered as a contiuum - Pleasing Everyone [ and Nobody ] at the same time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top