Study links bananas, oats and yoghurt to greater diabetes risk in susceptible
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
Heres the actual study, but neither yogurt or oats are mentioned as part of the food groups studied, other than a fleeting mention of fruit yogurt being excluded as a source of fruit
We should stop linking low quality bait like Guardian articles on this website
What readers of media outlets fail to remember is that your outlet of choice has worked to earn your trust for a reason. The reporter may even have the best of intentions in delivering news that makes us question bananas or yogurt, but in not recognizing the risks of their presumed authority, they are being grossly negligent and irresponsible with information.
It is a problem. We want to be informed, but who do you trust? Even scientific papers are prone to non-scientific influence, the studies themselves sometimes incentivized toward certain outcomes to please the sources of their grant money, or whatever. If we are just supposed to take every bit of info we consume with a grain of salt, the persistent low-grade stress and anxiety that comes with that is equally as damning as just throwing your hat into one particular media outlet's ring and saying "fine, whatever, I trust these guys."
This is the stuff that keeps me up at night, if I'm being honest.
That makes more sense.
Though a comparison against staple grains like wheat and soybeans wasn't analysed, corn had low pesticides.
If it was purely an amount of pesticide issue, the study would've highlighted low pesticide options like avocado, asparagus, or melons.
It could be amount x type of pesticide used. Maybe it's a single pesticide that is used mostly on Bananas but not berries, that is at fault here.
The edible part is enclosed in a thick skin that is discarded. And all the small-time banana growers I know, who use pesticides on other crops, just let their bananas grow naturally.
So is it polyphenols in the berries that reduce T1D incidence, or the pesticides found on fruits that cause it...
There is no reason to believe there is even an association between diet and Type 1 diabetes. In the absence of evidence for even this basic fact, simply finding a correlation between a whole bunch of foods and Type 1 diabetes seems fraught with all sorts of issues beyond even the fact that the study design can simply find correlations and not causations any ways.
You can also see the biases that the news likes to present. The correlation is not causation proviso is barely mentioned, and most of the article shows it as a causal link and uses the speculation that I may be pesticides to justify this causal link, when it comes to bananas, oats and yoghurt.
However, the last couple of paragraphs which mention the correlation between staying up at night and Type 2 diabetes (a disease where lifestyle factors are known to have a causal effect), the fact that it’s a correlation is mentioned almost immediately and forms the bulk of the reporting.
The same way that heart disease is strongly correlated with drinking diet soda. Once the person begins suffering from heart disease, diabetes etc they have a strong tendency to change their diet which causes the correlation.
Better to eat greek yoghurt or quark.
If you don't want to translate that, the second ingredient in the listing is sugar. The second link says that 50% of French people add sugar to the plain yogurt they buy from the store.
0: https://www.carrefour.fr/p/yaourt-fruits-mixes-brasse-carref... 1: https://www.cerin.org/breves-scientifiques/quelle-quantite-d...
It’s a study on Finnish children. It has nothing to do with Americans. I don’t know whether or not their yogurts tend to be sugary but nothing mentioned by anyone commenting on this thread has anything to do with the study.
This is a far better link with quotes from the researchers and others pointing out how this is extremely preliminary at best (not even peer reviewed yet, and even once it gets past peer review, it’s simply observational and cannot establish causation).
https://www.newsweek.com/type-1-diabetes-child-diet-nutritio...
Sweet yoghurt is definitely not an American thing. Up until the last 10-15 years it was quite hard to find unsweetened yoghurt in either the UK or much of Europe. In France it was particularly hard as they seemed to prefer sweetened set yoghurt. In Spain that's still the default as of quite recently.
I remember when I lived in the United States, you basically had "fat free" (with lots of sugar) and "greek" (with a little bit of fat, in addition to the sugar). That was 20 years ago, so it might have changed since then.
And it has little to do with the subject of the study, anyway.
This is why low-fat "yogurt" is an abomination. It pretends to be yogurt but it isn't. You can compare the same brand on the refrigerator shelf; the ingredients list for the whole-fat will be like "milk, cultures", but the low-fat's ingredient list will be many lines long. Just get the real thing, know how calorie-dense it is, and don't eat too much of it. It'll taste better too.
Yogurt in this context probably refers to some kiddy yogurts loaded with sugar and additives.
Why would you think carbs have anything to do with an increased risk of Type 1 diabetes?
as per the article - T1D causation is a mixture of genetics and unknown factors.
T1D and T2D are two separate conditions that share a similar name.
Not exactly. As you probably know, Type 1 diabetes involves no insulin production. Type 2 involves extreme, excessive insulin production. But at some point for some type 2 diabetics their pancreas can actually become so overworked it "gives out" and becomes incapable of producing insulin. They then actually become Type 1 diabetics and require insulin replacement to survive.
Likewise, a doctor can prescribe insulin to a type 2 diabetic who's pancreas is still working (and without even ever testing their insulin responses) - which some argue should never be done because it only makes the insulin problem worse. Type 2 diabetes is completely reversible for probably most people via diet and lifestyle changes. But in the "chronic management" model of care extreme type 2 diabetics run the risk of becoming type 1 diabetics by being prescribed supplemental insulin.
T2D involves extreme excessive insulin production? That would surely put the person into hypoglycaemia and losing significant weight whereas the stereotypical T2D is hyperglycaemia, and overweight. I was under the impression that it is the opposite, that the pancreas can’t produce enough insulin (or the body resists it) and so glucose levels are difficult to get down. Metformin tablets slows down the glucose levels being pushed out by the liver.
If that doesn’t work, then others try to increase insulin sensitivity.
Sorry, what?
Obesity is caused by taking in more calories than you burn off. One way to do that is through carbs, but you can just as easily consume too many calories by, say, eating to much fat. As a matter of fact, fat contains more calories per gram than carbs, although it's true that carbs are usually easier to eat in bulk before becoming satiated.
Btw, bananas are actually relatively high in carbohydrates.
Think about it more, why can a type 1 diabetic eat thousands and thousands of calories in a day but still lose weight? They can take in 5000+ calories, they lose weight. Type 1 diabetics without insulin replacement will waste away no matter what they eat sitting around all day. Whats going on with the "simple" in/out theory here?
On the flip side, someone with insulin resistence can eat a bunch of oats and will have insulin response that takes triple the time for insulin to fall back to baseline compared to a healthy person without resistance. They will also produce 2 or 3 times as much insulin compared to whats considered a healthy response. And their fasting insulin could also be elevated. And they will be hungrier, not satiated. And they gain weight no matter how much they try to "move more" and "burn it off".
Insulin in this effect is a storage hormone, a growth hormone. Insulin prevents your body from making ketones bodies from your body fat ("burning fat"). It makes sense - if food is coming in we don't need to access our fat stores, we need to use the new food for energy to move around or new storage or thermogenesis. and get the incoming glucose into cells and out of the blood.
Fat triggers an insulin response that is a fraction of what proteins or carbs would.
Insulin above a fasting baseline causes an anabolic state in the body. Insulin at a low fasting base line causes a catabolic state.
Fat has more calories per gram but will not spike someone's insulin and cause it to remain excessively and chronically elevated. Anytime insulin is elevated you cannot burn your fat stores.
Carbohydrates are more likely to cause increased hunger and energy storage. Fat will not have this same effect.
The rise in obesity runs in lock step with the history of the USDA guidelines declaring your energy intake should be 40-60% carbohydrates (hundreds of grams of carbs per day), the food pyramid, long term decreased fat consumption per capita, and the rise of ultra processed foods. Ultra processed foods that are: designed to be addictive, loaded with refined carbohydrates and/or added sugars, absent of fiber, and have a long shelf life for transportation and shelf storage.
https://undark.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/HallEJCN2017-1...