Sociodemographic factors, average body mass index, fasting and random glucose levels, and hemoglobin A1c concentrations didn't change from 2016 to 2021.
That's especially perplexing.
That's especially perplexing.
Surely, remote learning and cancellation of intramural sports, etc, led to worse average fittness.
Home cooking for most people uses tons of sauces/cheeses/creams/butter/chocolate/breads/etc loaded with sugar and sat fats.
A restaurant chef once told me, 'not as much as we do'. I was in a city that required chain restaurants to put sodium quantities (and maybe other data) on the menues. The numbers were eye-watering.
> A high-fat, high-saturated fat diet decreases insulin sensitivity without changing intra-abdominal fat in weight-stable overweight and obese adults
https://diabetesjournals.org/diabetes/article/63/7/2356/3433...
> Despite comparable weight gain after 49 days, this double-blind trial showed that overeating energy from PUFAs prevented deposition of liver fat and visceral and total fat compared with SFAs. Excess energy from SFAs caused an increase of liver fat compared with PUFAs. Further, the inhibitory effect of PUFAs on ectopic fat was accompanied by an augmented increase in lean tissue and less total body fat deposition compared with SFAs. Thus, the type of fat in the diet seems to be a novel and important determinant of liver fat accumulation, fat distribution, and body composition during moderate weight gain. We also observed fatty acid–dependent differences in adipose tissue gene expression. The significant decrease in pancreatic fat in both groups during weight gain was an unexpected finding that needs confirmation due to the low amounts of pancreatic fat in this lean population.
I ate keto for a couple years and still generally fall closer to that bucket, though I'm not dealing with any health issues and started eating some breads and carbs again. All the researchers, dieticians, and excercise/fitness coaches I learned from are all still agreed that sugar is bad for you as far as I'm aware. I haven't heard any of them pivot towards saying there are benefits from any meaningful intake of sugars.
All across Canada, for example, the government-imposed and "public health"-imposed restrictions were remarkably harmful to the health of the general public.
It varied somewhat by region, but pretty much all fitness facilities, including gyms, were shut down for extended (many months, if not longer) periods of time. Some never reopened. Losing access to facilities like those was a big problem in a country where harsh winters can seriously limit outdoor activities for several months each year.
There were also curfews and other restrictions that prevented or severely limited people from doing exercise and other physical activity outside.
The lockdowns and restrictions also destroyed or seriously harmed many businesses, which resulted in significant stress for the employees, owners, suppliers, and others affected. They suffered financial harm, job losses, business losses, and so on.
The forced masking and forced shots caused significant stress for those who were lucky enough to not lose their jobs or businesses.
Hospitals, medical clinics, and doctors cancelled or significantly delayed huge numbers of procedures and screenings.
Those are just a few examples. It went well beyond those. I didn't touch on the harm from the education-related restrictions, for instance.
Between 2020 and 2023 in Canada, blatantly idiotic "public health" policies caused far more people far more physical and mental harm than any virus did.
Did lots of walks and outdoor workouts, got a tonne of sunlight and vitamin D
On the other hand, just within my own friend group my experiences were quite polar and many of my friends tripled their alcohol intake or ate even more unhealthy take-out food or would start baking cakes and cookies everyday...
Been a weird couple years for sure.
Physical Activity:
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/5/2235
https://bmjopensem.bmj.com/content/bmjosem/7/1/e000960.full....
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000368702...
Diet:
https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/15/15/3494
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41430-021-00897-3
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016762962...
> In our study, baseline clinical characteristics of patients with incident type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes were not different during nonpandemic and pandemic years. This is consistent with other studies showing similarity in age, HbA1c, and body mass index among patients with incident diabetes before and during the pandemic.
If this is the section you mean that's not discordant, what they're saying is that people with diabetes have similar characteristics during non pandemic and pandemic years. It doesn't comment on whether more people in general have increased BMI therefore placing them at risk for T2DM.
I think lockdowns + wfh pushed most people to one extreme or the other.
How could both possibly be true?
They're talking about these values in the diabetic population, not youth in general. They are simply saying there are more diabetics, but they have similar characteristics as pre-pandemic diabetics. This is expected.