# Potato Diet



## MoonRiver

I'm trying the potato diet for 30 days (or more). I allow a little bit of fat every day, but other than that just potatoes.

I'm giving me the option of adding cruciferous vegetables (broccoli, cauliflower, etc) if I really feel the need for something besides potatoes.

Potatoes are close to the perfect food with the vitamins and minerals we need. I take a B12 pill and a fish oil capsule just to cover all the bases.

I'm using it as an elimination diet. I think something in my diet is causing things like sinus congestion, allergies, headaches, etc, so I will see if they go away when eating just potatoes. If so, I will slowly add foods back in to determine what is safe for me to eat.

It's only been 3 days, but my blood pressure is down significantly. Energy was great yesterday and nonexistent today. That pattern often occurs in fasting where the 3rd day is the hardest, so I'm hoping energy picks back up again.

Just to explain a little, I have been mostly on a low carb diet for the last 20 years. It didn't work for me - I would lose 10 - 20 lbs and then get overwhelming cravings, and then gain all the weight plus more back. I was able to maintain a 50 lb loss, but it was a constant struggle and I was still 50+ lbs overweight.

Last fall, I learned that I had some genetic problems that made it difficult for my body to digest and metabolize fats. I think that explained why a low carb, high fat diet didn't work and created cravings for me. So I started eating a low fat diet and was able to lose and maintain about 30 additional lbs of weight loss (80 total).

Since then I have lost and regained the same 10 lbs over and over again. I'm pretty sure it is something in my diet that is the problem. So, since I love potatoes and am already eating a high starch, low fat diet, a potato diet seemed to be a good way to lose a few more lbs and flush my body before I start adding foods back in. 

And even more importantly, potatoes are the only food I have found that lowers my BP. I've tried just about every possible supplement, several BP meds, breathing exercises, meditation, exercise, etc, and potatoes beat them all.


----------



## Oregon1986

I always thought potatoes were a big no no for weight loss


----------



## MoonRiver

Oregon1986 said:


> I always thought potatoes were a big no no for weight loss


We have been brainwashed to think that. Meat was a luxury in the past and most societies ate meals based on starches like potatoes or rice. I'm thinking that there is a potential problem when someone eats a lot of starch and fat.

ETA: Think about how we fix potatoes. Baked potato with butter and/or sour cream, potatoes fried in fat, mashed potatoes with milk and butter, scalloped potatoes with butter, flour, and cheese, potato chips fried in oil, etc. 

I've been eating a lot of baked potatoes cooked in my air fryer with no oil.


----------



## Tyler520

you could lose weight on a McDonald's diet so long as you have a caloric deficit.

But not all calories are created equal when it comes to proper body function

in my opinion, this isn't a healthy diet.

Only the consumption of protein can help build and maintain muscle tissue.

protein and fat is also critical for healthy brain function.


----------



## ShannonR

Curious as to how this turns out.... will set my personal opinion aside. Please keep us updated?


----------



## Bellyman

I have heard about studies done quite a few years ago where participants ate a diet of mostly potatoes. There is a lecture that talks about such among the recordings of Dr. McDougall. I'm sure you could find the whole lecture if you googled. He has quite a lot of his lectures online, and free. I don't get the impression he would want a person to eat nothing but potatoes for the rest of their lives but for those who have eaten mostly potatoes for extended periods of time, they did pretty well health wise.

MoonRiver, please do keep us updated as you progress. I'm definitely interested in how it works for you as I'm sure some others are, too.


----------



## Terri

As a person with many food allergies, this is a good idea! Personally, I found that as long as I did not eat the same food every day that my food allergies did not bother me. So, when you do add foods in, try rotating them.

For example today I ate chicken in spaghetti sauce. So, tomorrow I will eat fish and cole slaw and corn bread (and no tomatos). I have no symptoms at all unless I eat the same food 3? days running.

For me, it works well to keep my food allergies from bothering me.


----------



## HermitJohn

Lot peasants lived on potatoes or turnips or other starchy veggies throughout history. Just getting enough calories of any kind was the problem for majority of people until 20th century. They couldnt be picky.


----------



## HermitJohn

Tyler520 said:


> Only the consumption of protein can help build and maintain muscle tissue.
> 
> protein and fat is also critical for healthy brain function.


First I strongly agree with with need for plenty of natural fat in diet. The brain is mostly composed of fat. Lot of fats sold are chemically messed with to shelf stabilize them. If fat been chemically modified, not good for you.
`
But we disagree on protein. Vegetables and nuts and grains such DO contain protein. Most people way overeat on protein. If you enjoy eating lots of meat, fine, but dont tell everybody that only eating pounds of meat at every meal will keep you healthy. Most of the human labor done through centuries fueled by plants. Usually only the wealthy elite aristocracy ate huge amounts of meat. Peasant might poach occasional rabbit on the kings land (and it was all the kings land) or grandma might accidently swallow a fly in her sleep, but otherwise it was rather rare luxury. And no I dont know why she swallowed that fly, perhaps she'll die.

Traditonally before all the weird engineered (for maximum profit) factory foods, if you got enough calories, you got enough protein. Still true if you avoid the processed stuff.

Saying that, personally after three years dealing with diabetes, I wouldnt advocate a high starch diet for anybody. If it zooms a diabetic's blood sugar, guessing its not best thing for a normal person?? Potatoes are big no-no for me. I would do about as well eating couple tablespoon pure sugar as eating a cooked potato. But you dont need to eat meat to eat low starch diet. Just think fat for your calories rather than carbohydrates. Things like nuts and oily seeds are high in fat.

Though interesting bit trivia, after reading that raw potato would not raise blood sugar, I tried it. Yep zero rise in blood sugar. Seems human body cant digest raw potato starch. Unfortunately raw potatoes arent very tasty....


----------



## HermitJohn

MoonRiver said:


> Last fall, I learned that I had some genetic problems that made it difficult for my body to digest and metabolize fats. I think that explained why a low carb, high fat diet didn't work and created cravings for me.


Life is never easy. I wonder if its all fats or just some? Meaning your body might be more tolerant of some kinds of fat?

But just remember: 


> Jack Sprat could eat no fat.
> His wife could eat no lean.
> And so between them both, you see,
> They licked the platter clean.


----------



## MoonRiver

HermitJohn said:


> Life is never easy. I wonder if its all fats or just some? Meaning your body might be more tolerant of some kinds of fat?
> 
> But just remember:


It's primarily saturated fat.


----------



## Bellyman

HermitJohn, just out of curiosity, have you experimented with different kinds of potatoes? I have heard that not all potatoes are created equal when it comes to insulin response. There's red vs white vs other colors and then there is boiled vs fried vs baked, and even double baked. 

I was curious, since you seem to have been down this road. I also realize that what might spike one person in a big way may not be a big deal to another, kinda like an allergen might be really nasty to one person while to another person, not so much. But I still wondered.


----------



## Terri

Bellyman said:


> HermitJohn, just out of curiosity, have you experimented with different kinds of potatoes? I have heard that not all potatoes are created equal when it comes to insulin response. There's red vs white vs other colors and then there is boiled vs fried vs baked, and even double baked.


I am a diabetic, and, basically, it is the soft "bakers" that raise the blood sugar the most. The harder ones that do not fall apart in a stew will affect the blood sugar the least. Also the riper the potato is the more it will affect the blood sugar: new potatos affect my blood sugar less

Also, I checked the protein level of potatos: For a veggie they are pretty high in protein. They are probably low in things like calcium-I think- but not too bad for protein. I would not suggest the OP stay on a potato diet with a little added fat indefinitely, but it looks pretty good to cleanse her system! Because I know I am allergic to them it would not be a good diet for me but it might work out well for the OP


----------



## Bellyman

Thanks, Terri

Actually, the soft bakers are the ones I like the least. But it's good to have the added perspective. I hadn't thought about how mature the potatoes were as being a factor.


----------



## Tyler520

yes, it completely depends on your activity. 

except the body needs the consumption of fat to maintain its stores - the research is pretty strong: keto diet has been shown to almost completely stabilize autistic children and dementia patients.

I would agree on source of fat: I never eat trans or hydrogenated.

also agree that activity should dictate diet, but then again, I also endorse an active lifestyle - if you're like me, and an active weightlifter, or like amny on here who enjoy doing hard DIY work around the house or homestead, getting at least 1 gram of protein per pound body weight is pretty important. Also, animal proteins, particularly beef, are the only natural sources for many critical amino acids.

Protein and fat ratios can definitely be adjusted per activity, but carbs should definitely be at a minimum regardless - especially with today's lazy lifestyles --- and should primarily be consumed as vegetables and some fruit rather than starchy simple carbs




HermitJohn said:


> First I strongly agree with with need for plenty of natural fat in diet. The brain is mostly composed of fat. Lot of fats sold are chemically messed with to shelf stabilize them. If fat been chemically modified, not good for you.
> `
> But we disagree on protein. Vegetables and nuts and grains such DO contain protein. Most people way overeat on protein. If you enjoy eating lots of meat, fine, but dont tell everybody that only eating pounds of meat at every meal will keep you healthy. Most of the human labor done through centuries fueled by plants. Usually only the wealthy elite aristocracy ate huge amounts of meat. Peasant might poach occasional rabbit on the kings land (and it was all the kings land) or grandma might accidently swallow a fly in her sleep, but otherwise it was rather rare luxury. And no I dont know why she swallowed that fly, perhaps she'll die.
> 
> Traditonally before all the weird engineered (for maximum profit) factory foods, if you got enough calories, you got enough protein. Still true if you avoid the processed stuff.
> 
> Saying that, personally after three years dealing with diabetes, I wouldnt advocate a high starch diet for anybody. If it zooms a diabetic's blood sugar, guessing its not best thing for a normal person?? Potatoes are big no-no for me. I would do about as well eating couple tablespoon pure sugar as eating a cooked potato. But you dont need to eat meat to eat low starch diet. Just think fat for your calories rather than carbohydrates. Things like nuts and oily seeds are high in fat.
> 
> Though interesting bit trivia, after reading that raw potato would not raise blood sugar, I tried it. Yep zero rise in blood sugar. Seems human body cant digest raw potato starch. Unfortunately raw potatoes arent very tasty....


ds on one


----------



## MoonRiver

Tyler520 said:


> Protein and fat ratios can definitely be adjusted per activity, but carbs should definitely be at a minimum regardless - especially with today's lazy lifestyles --- and should primarily be consumed as vegetables and some fruit rather than starchy simple carbs
> 
> ds on one


Tell that to 1 billion Chinese.


----------



## HermitJohn

Bellyman said:


> HermitJohn, just out of curiosity, have you experimented with different kinds of potatoes? I have heard that not all potatoes are created equal when it comes to insulin response. There's red vs white vs other colors and then there is boiled vs fried vs baked, and even double baked.
> 
> I was curious, since you seem to have been down this road. I also realize that what might spike one person in a big way may not be a big deal to another, kinda like an allergen might be really nasty to one person while to another person, not so much. But I still wondered.


Even when I was on insulin, couldnt tolerate potatoes or rice. Not at all. One spoonful is too much. Though no I didnt buy every type potato out there and prepare them in all ways possible. Wasnt that important. I experimented a bit with what I had on hand and that was it. Pretty obvious potatoes no longer an option. Possible some rare waxy potato only grown in certain region of Peru... Saw documentary once where they have certain low tech way of freeze drying them.....

The only starchy foods I can tolerate is canned hominy. (not grits) or maybe half cup mung or black beans or garbonzos. Oh, peanuts in this same catagory too. No idea what is special about hominy since its just processed corn. Something in the processing I guess. Helps that there is no great desire to eat a lot of it. Seriously cant imagine anybody wanting huge helping at one sitting. But maybe half can added to stir fry is fine. found out cause I had can in back of cupboard after diabetes diagnoses so experimented rather than just tossing it. Lot stuff I did have to toss.

Oh also can tolerate millet best of any cooked whole grain, but again not more than half cup at a meal. Half cup limit means lot stuff just not worth the bother to cook. This means half cup of ONE of these at a meal, not half cup of each.


----------



## HermitJohn

MoonRiver said:


> Tell that to 1 billion Chinese.


I am sure they have developed lot tolerance over the centuries, just as have Europeans. Doesnt mean its good for them, just that they have genetically adapted as its what is available and affordable. Its the native populations not used to lot grain in their diet that have most problems with obesity and diabetes when forced to eat such.


----------



## MoonRiver

HermitJohn said:


> I am sure they have developed lot tolerance over the centuries, just as have Europeans. Doesnt mean its good for them, just that they have genetically adapted as its what is available and affordable. Its the native populations not used to lot grain in their diet that have most problems with obesity and diabetes when forced to eat such.


I don't think that's it. Science shows that both a low carb and a high carb diet are healthy. My guess is that on a high carb diet, fat needs to be greatly limited. I think it is a high carb, high fat diet that leads to obesity.

Some people can eat a high carb, high fat diet without gaining weight, but I think for the majority of the population, it needs to be either high carb OR high fat.


----------



## HermitJohn

MoonRiver said:


> I don't think that's it. Science shows that both a low carb and a high carb diet are healthy. My guess is that on a high carb diet, fat needs to be greatly limited. I think it is a high carb, high fat diet that leads to obesity.
> 
> Some people can eat a high carb, high fat diet without gaining weight, but I think for the majority of the population, it needs to be either high carb OR high fat.


Dont know, except we have had big experiment thanks to the huge push for low fat diet. We've created a country eating lot carbs and chemicals. More and more sugar to replace fats. Anything to cheapen product yet make it addictive and highly profitable. Food companies would put opium in their post toasties if they could. Sugar is pretty close....

Think what us diabetics are trying to point out, there is a big difference in carbohydrates. Density and how they are bound to fiber makes big difference. Quantity too, but with low density carbs with lot fiber means you wont eat nearly as much of it. Whole grain has fiber, but its also extremely carbohydrate dense. I suppose I could go look it up, but from my experience guessing potatoes dont have all that much fiber compared to amount of carbs. 

I know it was big shock when i found out a fresh raw tomato would zoom my blood sugar. That seemed really cruel. Doesnt always make lot sense at first blush, but like always the devil is in the details. I didnt really experiment anymore with tomatoes, though some friends were up to Ozarks for Xmas and invited me to dinner. They had chilli with tomato and beans. Oddly when I got home it hadnt had much effect on my blood sugar. Never figured out why. Maybe the high protein? Kidney beans and tomato should have elevated it noticably. Maybe cause tomatoes were cooked? Maybe just cause of a particular combination of ingredients?


----------



## Tyler520

MoonRiver said:


> Tell that to 1 billion Chinese.


that's a simplistic rebuttal.

the chinese may not be obese but they are far from "healthy"

most chinese eat a subsistence diet based in which calories in/calories out balance, and would never suffice for athletic performance or other high physical activity. Our poorer ancestors in the 19th century and earlier ate primarily bread because it was all they could afford, not because it was healthy - because it definitely wasn't healthy: horrible teeth, brittle bones, deformed skeletal structures, the physiques of a child ( or a modern Chinese).

leaps in Human brain development precisely coincides with spikes in animal protein and fat consumption.

The difference between sedentary Chinese and sedentary Americans is net caloric intake; many Americans consume far more than they expend, and primarily comprised of processed carbs (which is the primary ingredient in 2 in 3 items on a grocery store shelf); they are obese, yet experience what is called "obese malnourishment" 

If human existence was compressed to an hour, the time that grains have existed in our diet would be 1 minute - it is 'foreign' to our diet

This is bio 101, settled science. not debatable


----------



## Skamp

I'm going to say up front that it really concerns me that you would subject yourself to this strict of a diet.

With that said, most if not all, potatoes, grains, and beans turn to resistant starch after cooking then cooling. They are basically indigestible in the small intestine and are digested in the colon into fatty acids.


----------



## Terri

Mother nature loves variety. That way, when there is a change in conditions (such as another mini ice age) there will be people with the genetics to take the change in conditions and stay healthy.

when it comes to diet I am at one end of the spectrum: I do well on lean meat and some grain. Moon River is apparently on the other end of the spectrum: she does well on mostly potatos, which would make my blood sugar go way up.

Native Americans ate a high meat diet for uncounted generations, and their tolerance for carbs tends to be very poor. A high proportion of them have diabetes .But, Orientals ate a high carb diet for uncounted generations and their tolerance for carbs tends to be very high. That is Mother NAture (AKA evolution) in action: with enough genetic diversity humans thrive under very different conditions.

I think that is why studies show improvements in health under both high fat and low fat diets. It isn't the diet: it is the test subjects. Humans are not all alike.


----------



## MoonRiver

Ideally, we should eat with the seasons, which means high fat/lower carb part of the year, high carb/lower fat part of the year, etc. The problem now is having things like fruits and sugars available every day of the year.


----------



## Terri

MMMMM I do not know if I agree with it being healthier for us to eat with the seasons. Partly because our species probably evolved in the tropic, and partly because the vegetables that store the best- like potatos- and pretty darned hard on my system. And if we eat stricktly according to what each season produces then in Kansas there will be no wintertime vegetables at all, and that is not healthy unless you have a bottle of vitamin pills.


----------



## Bellyman

Tyler520 said:


> ...
> 
> If human existence was compressed to an hour, the time that grains have existed in our diet would be 1 minute - it is 'foreign' to our diet
> 
> This is bio 101, settled science. not debatable


I'm not sure it's as settled as you suggest. Kinda depends on who's version of history you believe. There are quite a few and may not be quite what history books suggest.

The Native American population is one example. They were not all nomads. There were groups of them that stayed in one place, farmed and built houses. But we don't generally talk about that nor think of it when we think about Native Americans.


----------



## MoonRiver

Terri said:


> MMMMM I do not know if I agree with it being healthier for us to eat with the seasons. Partly because our species probably evolved in the tropic, and partly because the vegetables that store the best- like potatos- and pretty darned hard on my system. And if we eat stricktly according to what each season produces then in Kansas there will be no wintertime vegetables at all, and that is not healthy unless you have a bottle of vitamin pills.


What did people in Kansas eat during the winter 500 years ago? Probably nuts, dried fruits and berries, maybe some smoked meat, whatever animals they could kill, and maybe some roots they dug up.

Think about what man ate up until a few hundred years ago. They ate what they killed or what they found growing. That's what our genetics reflect. Our genetics haven't changed in the last few hundred years.

**** Sapiens have several genetic haplogroups. Both of my haplogroups (mother and father) are western European. As humans moved out of Africa, they formed into groups (haplogroups) with common genetic makeup. To a large degree, this determines the light conditions and diet that is best suited to a haplogroup member. It's one of the reasons that people with African ancestry who live in temperate areas are subject to higher rates of some diseases than whites. Africans have a different haplotype, so their genetics reflect the tropics. 

And not to get too technical (because a lot of the science is beyond me), but we are a species based on light. There is light stored in food and our bodies expect to receive food whose light signature matches actual light conditions. Part of the nutritional problem we face is the mismatch caused by all the out of season foods available in the grocery store. That's partly why the eat local movement is so strong.


----------



## MoonRiver

Terri said:


> Native Americans ate a high meat diet for uncounted generations, and their tolerance for carbs tends to be very poor.


You're forgetting about corn (maize). It was a diet mainstay for many native Americans. And what about wild rice, beans, tubers, and maple sugar?


----------



## Terri

MoonRiver said:


> What did people in Kansas eat during the winter 500 years ago? Probably nuts, dried fruits and berries, maybe some smoked meat, whatever animals they could kill, and maybe some roots they dug up.


I misunderstood you. When you said to eat with the season I thought you meant to eat what each season produced. Yes, in Kansas they did dry fruit for the winter and they also either raised corn or traded for it.


----------



## Skamp

MoonRiver said:


> What did people in Kansas eat during the winter 500 years ago? Probably nuts, dried fruits and berries, maybe some smoked meat, whatever animals they could kill, and maybe some roots they dug up.
> 
> Think about what man ate up until a few hundred years ago. They ate what they killed or what they found growing. That's what our genetics reflect. Our genetics haven't changed in the last few hundred years.
> 
> **** Sapiens have several genetic haplogroups. Both of my haplogroups (mother and father) are western European. As humans moved out of Africa, they formed into groups (haplogroups) with common genetic makeup. To a large degree, this determines the light conditions and diet that is best suited to a haplogroup member. It's one of the reasons that people with African ancestry who live in temperate areas are subject to higher rates of some diseases than whites. Africans have a different haplotype, so their genetics reflect the tropics.
> 
> And not to get too technical (because a lot of the science is beyond me), but we are a species based on light. There is light stored in food and our bodies expect to receive food whose light signature matches actual light conditions. Part of the nutritional problem we face is the mismatch caused by all the out of season foods available in the grocery store. That's partly why the eat local movement is so strong.


We are a species based on grains. Take your quarter acre and do what you will.


----------



## Terri

MoonRiver said:


> You're forgetting about corn (maize). It was a diet mainstay for many native Americans. And what about wild rice, beans, tubers, and maple sugar?


Yes they did. I did not say they ONLY ate meat, I said they ate a lot of meat.

And, as a nurse, I can tell you that the carb intolerance of the Native American is infamous.


----------



## MoonRiver

Terri said:


> Yes they did. I did not say they ONLY ate meat, I said they ate a lot of meat.
> 
> And, as a nurse, I can tell you that the carb intolerance of the Native American is infamous.


That doesn't make sense. They ate a lot of carbs.

Is it processed carbs that causes the problem?


----------



## MoonRiver

Terri said:


> I misunderstood you. When you said to eat with the season I thought you meant to eat what each season produced. Yes, in Kansas they did dry fruit for the winter and they also either raised corn or traded for it.


In a way, we are a lot like bears. In the fall we fatten up for the winter. That way, we can live off our fat when food is limited. (I'm talking hundreds and thousands of years ago - our genetic makeup). Or take any N American mammal. Fatten up in the fall and then try to survive the winter. Look forward to new life in the Spring.


----------



## Terri

MoonRiver said:


> That doesn't make sense. They ate a lot of carbs.
> 
> Is it processed carbs that causes the problem?


What does not make sense? They ate a lot of meat. They did also eat *SOME* carbs. But, when you consider that in modern times over one-half of some tribes have been diagnosed with diabetes, I am fairly sure their ancestors ate much more meat than carbs.


----------



## MoonRiver

Terri said:


> What does not make sense? They ate a lot of meat. They did also eat *SOME* carbs. But, when you consider that in modern times over one-half of some tribes have been diagnosed with diabetes, I am fairly sure their ancestors ate much more meat than carbs.


Can someone get diabetes by eating fruits and vegetables?


----------



## Bellyman

MoonRiver said:


> Can someone get diabetes by eating fruits and vegetables?


That's a good question. I don't know what would happen if someone ate nothing but high sugar type fruits. I know they generally have a good bit of fiber if eaten as the whole fruit but still, I wouldn't think a diet that unbalanced would be so good for you. I would think a wide variety of vegetables would be more preventative of someone getting diabetes. Vegetables covers a good bit of territory. If someone ate nothing but lettuce, I doubt they'd get diabetes, but they'd have other problems that were just as big.


----------



## MoonRiver

Bellyman said:


> That's a good question. I don't know what would happen if someone ate nothing but high sugar type fruits. I know they generally have a good bit of fiber if eaten as the whole fruit but still, I wouldn't think a diet that unbalanced would be so good for you. I would think a wide variety of vegetables would be more preventative of someone getting diabetes. Vegetables covers a good bit of territory. If someone ate nothing but lettuce, I doubt they'd get diabetes, but they'd have other problems that were just as big.


I was really questioning why native Americans got diabetes. My guess is it was from eating high sugar, white bread, and processed carbs, not from eating fruits and vegetables.


----------



## Terri

MoonRiver said:


> Can someone get diabetes by eating fruits and vegetables?


A person's pancreas will only do so much, and it does vary. Basically diabetes is when your pancreas is not doing its job well enough.

Carbs make your pancreas work hard. In the case of the Orientals, For thousands of years they have relied on rice for their main diet, and if they did not have an excellent pancreas that could hand a high rice diet then they died young and did not pass their genes on. When the Europeans settled in China they called diabetes "the White man's disease" because the Orientals rarely got it.

They do get it now. They added sugar to their diet, and Oriental diabetic children no longer die for lack of medicine. 

I am mostly descended from European meat eaters and Portuguese fish eaters, and todays Standard American Diet was too high in carbs for me. This was before all of the doctors understood about carb intolerance, so when my B/P and triglycerides both went up, I was put on a low fat, high carb diet. 2 years later I was very sick from that diet.

This put a strain on my pancreas it could not handle, damage was done, and now I am a type 2 diabetic. I only weigh 140 pounds, by the way.

At any rate, I was put on diabetes meds, and by understanding what my body is doing I have been able to decrease the amounts of meds that I must take. The damage that was done my mistreating my pancreas on the high caarb diet pancreas is permanent, it appears. With a diet that I am better suited for my diabetes is not much worse over the past 2 decades, but it isn't any better either.

So, it is not what you eat that matters so much as if you are eating the foods that your body tolerates. Large amounts of fruits and starchy vegetables (like potatos) are something I do not tolerate well, and neither is large amounts of sugar. I do better if I eat small amounts of grain instead of removing it entirely from my diet, but then Europeans have been eating grain with their soup and meat and fish for a very, very long time.

At any rate, extreme obesity can cause diabetes because our body organs were designed for a body that weighs 100-200 pounds, not 600. 600 pounds simply overloads our systems, and if the pancreas is able to manage that much weight chances are the heart or some other organ cannot cope with it. At 600 pounds something is likely to work badly, and while it is often the pancreas that cannot cope, the other organs might not be able to cope with the strain as well.

So, it is not so much what you eat, the question is, are you exceeding what your pancreas was designed to handle? For thousands of years my ancestors ate meat and vegetables along with whatever grain they raised, and that is actually what I do best on.
................................................

You have heard me mention triglycerides. Triglycerides care composed on 1 fat molecule to 3 sugar molecules, and it is one way your body brings down your blood sugar when it gets too high. It is deposited in the veins and arteries and can cause high blood pressure.

SO! Many people would tolerate a potato diet but many people do not. I think it is a logical thing to do short term, and then you can add foods back one at a time so that you can tell what you are allergic to. Some people would see their blood sugar go up on such a diet, but many people with outstanding pancreas's will have no trouble at all.

Mother Nature loves variety in our genes. If the climate changes like it did in the little ice age then grain crops in many areas will fail, as it did in the Little Ice Age. Some people will get sick on how their diet must change while other people will thrive. For thousands of years Orientals thrived on a high rice diet while Natives in the far North thrived on a diet that was heavy on fat and meat and fish. Good Health is not so much reliant on what you eat as it is if your body is suited to that diet or not.


----------



## Terri

MoonRiver said:


> I was really questioning why native Americans got diabetes. My guess is it was from eating high sugar, white bread, and processed carbs, not from eating fruits and vegetables.


Native Americans often get diabetes from eating the same foods that you eat. Evolution suited many people to eat more steak and fewer potatos. But that is not the Standard American Diet of fries with every sandwich in every cafe. I can tell you that unprocessed carbs have almost the same effect on my blood sugar as processed carbs do. And high blood sugar and high carbs of any sort can wear down the pancreas. Some people have a pancreas that is designed for high carb diets and they have no trouble with high carbs. I do not. And, it appears a great number of Native Americans do not. The ideal for me is lean meat, salad, and a roll on the side. This gives me energy and my blood sugar does not go up


----------



## MoonRiver

As I suspected, the increase in diabetes is directly related to government food handouts to native Americans:

"For decades after Word War II, the main supply of food on most “Indian Reservations” was government-supplied industrialized food chain products: Canned and boxed foods. Fry bread is actually a creative solution to a nutritional dilemma: Just *** can you make to eat with lard and flour?

Still, at least three generations of Natives grew up eating this stuff, so it’s now embraced as the “traditional diet.” And the rise of Native diabetes follows the trajectory of commodities, so the main area of intervention in Native diabetes programs is in trying to change the way people cook. This varies from advocating modest diet changes to radical calls for a to return pre-European-contact raw diets. healthline"​


----------



## Terri

Canned and boxed food is part of the Standard American diet, yes?

My families diet-the diet I was raised on- is heavy in UNPROCESSED food, but my blood sugar goes up every time I visit. For them big bowls of beets raised in the backyard plus 2 other types of vegetables is healthy, but not for me.

And, yes, there are attempts to encourage Native Americans to change their diets to something that is higher in fiber and lower in carbs. Boxed foods are almost always high carb


----------



## HermitJohn

I knew insulin for type2 is dead end. Thats why I worked so hard to get off soon as possible, though doc was perfectly happy with me on it forever I guess long as numbers looked good. Its very easy to put on weight taking insulin and you get into cycle of more weight, more insulin.... I had amount of insulin way down, but when I went off it entirely, whee, my blood sugar control was very weak. Diet I had worked out when I was on insulin no longer worked. I kept eliminating stuff until I was basically living on raw non-starchy veggie salads with nuts. But after six month, it was stabilizing. Plus darn tired of no cooked foods. Stir fry and soup ok.... and so started experimenting again.

Three years later, its lot more stable. If I eat bit too much fruit for example, it will rise to 140 or 150, but then quickly come back down to 110. I doubt I ever become "normal" again where it never goes above 100 whatever I eat. Plus frankly as annoying as it is sometimes, the diet I've developed for myself has improved other health problems. I am not stupid, when something works, stick with it long as possible. Even if I could suddenly handle lot more starch/sugar, wouldnt do it. I am convinced that high starch/sugar diet simply isnt healthy for anybody whatever their genetics. My treat with improved blood sugar control, now comes in form of being able to eat more whole raw fruits. Whole apple instead of half.

As far as Native Americans, Hawaiians and others prone to diabetes. Its lot genetics. But they were marginalized when white man took their land and their living. Put them on scrub land white man didnt want, and on the dole. poverty means you dont have luxury of good quality foods of any kind. Usually you are pushed into cheapst high starch foods out there. With fast food and twinkies as your treats. Combo of genetic predisposition to diabetes and cheapo crappo food equals disaster.

I was eating the good whole grains and beans and I got diabetes. Not the SAD diet at all. Doc was amazed when I had low cholesterol. Seems most newly diagnosed type2 diabetics have the high cholesterol and blocked arteries, etc. He said AMA tells docs to automatically put newly diagnosed diabetics on statins before they are even tested, that its so common. My blood pressure was high normal but most likely from stress my body was going through with the diabetes. I had normal blood pressure within three weeks of diagnosis and being on insulin.

I couldnt believe how much my monthly food bill went up when I bought only raw non-starchy produce and nuts. And at time avacodos were cheap, three or four for $1 so had that as treat. Now they want like $1.25+ each so simply dont buy them. 

And home grown doesnt mean its magically low glycemic load. For example beets and potatoes are high glycemic load veggies however they are grown. Though beet greens ok. Oh and cold cooked potatoes are high glycemic load just as are hot ones. Only RAW ones are low glycemic load simply cause your body cant digest them, the starch moves on out your body undigested.


----------



## Terri

The doctor who diagnosed me said that many diabetics do not want change their diet, and a few have asked her if surgery could be done instead. This was part of a pep talk my doctor gave me when I was discouraged. There are no quick fixes with diabetes. And, the diet I was given was only a starting point: my blood sugars bounced around until I realized that the American Diabetic Diet was calling for too many carbs in the morning, and during the day it was not allowing enough protein and fat. The ADA diet was a good starting point, but it needed some serious tweeking.

Speaking of diet, I bake a piece of fruit with a dab of butter, and it tastes a lot like pie filling. If the fruit is not sweet enough I will add a packet of NutraSweet and stir it up. YUM! I cut up the fruit peel and all, which gives it more flavor.
f
And, for me, not all starches are created equal. At dinner time I can eat 4 carb exchanges, but only one carb exchange can be a potato.

I have 5 siblings and I am the only diabetic. The rest of the family happily eats large amounts of produce. And, it will not hurt most non-diabetics to go on a potato diet for a few weeks, to give them a chance to figure out what they are allergic to.


----------



## MoonRiver

If anyone is up for an experiment, try getting outside in early am sun barefooted every morning. It is supposed to stimulate hormone production.

We have had so much rain this summer that my lawn is very lush. Not the burned out grass and hard dirt it usually is. I've started walking about 1/2 mile barefooted as soon as I get up.

A very limited view of this theory is that modern diseases are diseases of light. That these diseases started to flourish about the time we started using artificial light in our homes and businesses. Made worse with fluorescent lights and now blue lights from tv's, computers, and cell phones.

When you think about the long process of evolving from 1 cell organisms to humans, light was one of the controlling factors in the environment. Today we are exposed to so much artificial light that the wrong signals are continually sent to our brain and other organs resulting in too much or too little hormones being produced.

Minimizing exposure to artificial light and maximizing exposure to sunlight may be key to improving one's health. Think about people who go camping for a week and then say how much better they feel. Or people who go to the beach.

I know for a fact my blood pressure drops after going in the sun. Even in winter it drops, although not as much as in the summer. Going barefoot also causes it to drop, although not as much as direct sunlight.

One of the reasons is exposure to sunlight causes the production of vitamin d which results in nitric oxide which relaxes blood vessels.

Here's an old video by John Ott. He was an early researcher in how light effects both plants and animals. Reading his book, it is shocking how the medical world refused to acknowledge his findings. Even with well known MDs and PhD's backing his work, the medical establishment ridiculed his work because it didn't fit into their drugs for every disease approach to medicine.


----------



## HermitJohn

Terri said:


> The doctor who diagnosed me said that many diabetics do not want change their diet, and a few have asked her if surgery could be done instead. This was part of a pep talk my doctor gave me when I was discouraged. There are no quick fixes with diabetes. And, the diet I was given was only a starting point: my blood sugars bounced around until I realized that the American Diabetic Diet was calling for too many carbs in the morning, and during the day it was not allowing enough protein and fat. The ADA diet was a good starting point, but it needed some serious tweeking.
> 
> Speaking of diet, I bake a piece of fruit with a dab of butter, and it tastes a lot like pie filling. If the fruit is not sweet enough I will add a packet of NutraSweet and stir it up. YUM! I cut up the fruit peel and all, which gives it more flavor.
> f
> And, for me, not all starches are created equal. At dinner time I can eat 4 carb exchanges, but only one carb exchange can be a potato.
> 
> I have 5 siblings and I am the only diabetic. The rest of the family happily eats large amounts of produce. And, it will not hurt most non-diabetics to go on a potato diet for a few weeks, to give them a chance to figure out what they are allergic to.


Nobody in my family with diabetes either. At least the older generations that I am familiar with. Dont know any of younger generations. And older ones I was ever around ate typical Iowa farm diet. Meat, potatoes, pie, cake, lot garden produce. My parents were born in 1916 and 1919 and that generation liked baked fruit desserts, cobblers, etc, with lot sugar. I wasnt that fond of such. I dont know any of younger generations so no idea about them, and just one aunt in her 90s still alive that I actually know very well. And her mind isnt as sharp as it used to be. 

I was in exam room waiting at doc and heard through wall, him in another exam room severely scolding another diabetic. Apparently lot people truly resistant to change. Course I realize anybody living with other people have lot bigger hurdle to making radical changes. Those other people arent going to change just to adapt to your medical problems. Living alone as a hermit, I can do pretty well as I please. Cats dont care what I eat long as they get fed on time.

Course only dietary info my doc (old retired military doc) gave me was parting comment first or second visit of "knock off the sugar"... LOL No diet recommendation beyond that. Course my numbers started looking good early on so dont suppose he figured it would help. Well I did 'knock off the sugar', just not in way he was thinking, since I already truly ate few sweets. I knocked off the carbs. I saw the American Diabetic Diet in my research online. That thing made no sense to me. It was just a slightly healthier version of SAD, still LOT carbs. It was all based on controlling portions and calories to an extreme. Just like all the pop culture weight loss diets. A plan doomed to failure from getgo. You need permanent lifestyle change you can live with longterm, not a temporary fix. And calorie counting and thimble sized portions just wouldnt cut it long term. They are just annoying unless you just want to spend all your time thinking about such. Way I was eating obviously led to diabetes, so it had to change fundamentally and permanently.

Yep, not all carbs are created equal. There are some differences between individuals how they react to certain foods, but from what I observed, glycemic load ratings of foods with carbs, are pretty good clue to whats best things to eat. You still have to strictly limit total carbs, but those you do eat need to be low glycemic load. In other words those foods with carbs are better if they have boatload fiber so those carbs digest slowly.

I am not convinced artificial sweetners are good idea. But then I wasnt hooked on sugar, just grains, beans, and potatoes. In other words I prefered my ice tea and coffee without sugar my whole life, so no big deal avoiding sugar entirely without much effort. I suppose it would be necessary crutch for the sugar addicts.

And like you say, a potato diet short term shouldnt hurt a non-diabetic. Lot Irish and Peruvians lived on such their entire life. But I think high carb diet long term not good for any human even if they genetically can handle it. Nothing is isolated, its not just about sugar control, sure high carb diet has other negative effects.


----------

