Damsel in dis Dress wrote:

> What happened when you took it, Nancy? If you don't want to answer, that's
> quite alright by me.

Thank you. I only took it for a week and I developed extreme
distended abdomen, quite painful, and hallucinations. All this
for a sinus problem. Never. Again. I'll never be the same.

nancy (no nagging!)

Damsel in dis Dress wrote:

> What happened when you took it, Nancy? If you don't want to answer, that's
> quite alright by me.

Thank you. I only took it for a week and I developed extreme
distended abdomen, quite painful, and hallucinations. All this
for a sinus problem. Never. Again. I'll never be the same.

nancy (no nagging!)

Nancy Young wrote:

> Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
>
>
>>What happened when you took it, Nancy? If you don't want to answer, that's
>>quite alright by me.
>
>
> Thank you. I only took it for a week and I developed extreme
> distended abdomen, quite painful, and hallucinations. All this
> for a sinus problem. Never. Again. I'll never be the same.
>
> nancy (no nagging!)

Steroids are *serious* business! I know a man with gout
who'd rather take steroids than pain meds. I think he's
nuts! He also declines to take the uric acid inhibitor med
or the med that helps the uric acid pass out of your
systerm...fear of taking meds! Yet takes those damn steroids
when he gets a gout attack. <shakes head in dismay>
Goomba

Nancy Young wrote:

> Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
>
>
>>What happened when you took it, Nancy? If you don't want to answer, that's
>>quite alright by me.
>
>
> Thank you. I only took it for a week and I developed extreme
> distended abdomen, quite painful, and hallucinations. All this
> for a sinus problem. Never. Again. I'll never be the same.
>
> nancy (no nagging!)

Steroids are *serious* business! I know a man with gout
who'd rather take steroids than pain meds. I think he's
nuts! He also declines to take the uric acid inhibitor med
or the med that helps the uric acid pass out of your
systerm...fear of taking meds! Yet takes those damn steroids
when he gets a gout attack. <shakes head in dismay>
Goomba

Goomba38 wrote:
>
> Nancy Young wrote:

> > Thank you. I only took it for a week and I developed extreme
> > distended abdomen, quite painful, and hallucinations. All this
> > for a sinus problem. Never. Again. I'll never be the same.

> Steroids are *serious* business! I know a man with gout
> who'd rather take steroids than pain meds. I think he's
> nuts! He also declines to take the uric acid inhibitor med
> or the med that helps the uric acid pass out of your
> systerm...fear of taking meds! Yet takes those damn steroids
> when he gets a gout attack. <shakes head in dismay>

If someone said, either take these steroids or you'll be dead in
3 months, I would put my affairs in order. Goodbye to my family
and friends. No kidding.

nancy

Nancy Young > wrote in message >...
> Steve the Sauropodman wrote:
> >
> > Nancy Young > wrote in message
>
> > > I think it's like tailgating, you are expected to bring more food
> > > than you can possibly eat. I never even open half the stuff I bring.
>
> > We finally ended up with 32 people...WHEW! Jeez, can those people eat!!!
>
> Wow!! Lucky you had so much stuff! Glad you had a good time.
>
> nancy

Growing up in an Sicilian family the norm is to expect 20 and cook for 30

Steve

Nancy Young > wrote in message >...
> Steve the Sauropodman wrote:
> >
> > Nancy Young > wrote in message
>
> > > I think it's like tailgating, you are expected to bring more food
> > > than you can possibly eat. I never even open half the stuff I bring.
>
> > We finally ended up with 32 people...WHEW! Jeez, can those people eat!!!
>
> Wow!! Lucky you had so much stuff! Glad you had a good time.
>
> nancy

Growing up in an Sicilian family the norm is to expect 20 and cook for 30

Steve

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 13:57:10 GMT, hahabogus > wrote:

> A biggie question I have concerns the SR-17 USDA downloadable nutrition
>guide stand alone database (for Access or excell)....what does carbohydrate
>(by difference) mean and how does this relate to the info on product boxes?

The first, most important thing to remember is that different people have
different reactions to different foods. So you need to spend a while (Frank
and I spent a good three or four months) experimenting with foods and how
they impacted your glucose levels. Because no matter what any dietician
tells you, the reality is, diabetes is different for everyone, and they can
give you general guidelines, but it's up to you to figure out your own
particular idiosyncracies.

For example, I can't really eat french fries much without walking a great
deal afterwards. They just hammer my glucose something terrible. But pizza
I have no problem with at all. Frank gets high readings on both fries and
pizza, but is able to eat more fruits than I am without much of a blip.

You learn what foods impact you through testing. When we first started
out, we tested first thing when we woke up (actually, we still do that
every day, your fasting glucose number is the best determination for how
well you're really controlling your diabetes). A fasting BG of under 130
should be a goal, though it's not likely you'll get there right off.

Then, if breakfast isn't right away, I'd test just before breakfast. Then
I'd eat breakfast and just as I started eating, set a timer for 2 hours.
Note what you had for breakfast, and how many carbs it has (more on this in
a minute 'cos it actually answers your question above). Test again when the
timer goes off, that tells you what your 2 hr post prandial BG is. This
should be under 130, if you've got good control (sorry, not sure what the
conversion for that is for you). This tells you how much the food you had
at breakfast has impacted your BG. You can repeat this process with every
meal for a while, testing after different foods and different activity
levels.

One trick Frank and I found is that if we walk steadily for 10 to 15
minutes around an hour after we eat, it greatly reduces our BG reading at 2
hours post prandial. Also, it gives you the exercise you're supposed to be
getting.

So about fiber. The reason I brought the other stuff up first is because
what I'm saying now is very much "YMMV". Generally speaking, the body
doesn't process fiber in the same way it processes other carbohydrates
(fiber is a carbohydrate, but it's not something we are able to digest
readily). As a result, grams of fiber carbs don't generally impact people's
blood glucose levels.

In the United States, they include the amount of fiber *with* the total
carbs on packaging. In Europe (and possibly Canada, I've not asked around)
the fiber grams are listed separately from the other carbohydrates. So if
the fiber is included in the total carbs on a package, subtract the grams
of fiber from the total grams of carbs and that gives you the "net carbs"
of the particular food. "Net carbs" is the amount of carbs that are most
likely to impact your BG. I've found it to work consistently as a rule of
thumb, and I don't find that fiber carbs impact my BG at all. But I've
read from other people that this rule of thumb doesn't work for them (I
have to admit a certain skepticism and suspicion that they might not be
testing on this properly, but I'm not in a position to say that for
certain), so that's why you need to do your own testing.

The fact is, the reason fiber is good to have is *because* it's not
digested. It's good for your colon because it helps clean things out. If
it's not digested, it never makes it to your blood stream, therefore it is
physically impossible for it to have a direct impact on your BG. Which is
why I'm not completely convinced that the people who claim fiber raises
their BG aren't confusing it with something else. That doesn't mean,
however, that there isn't something else going on with these individuals
that is leading to a spike that somehow corrolates to but is not caused by
the presence of fiber in a food item.

Anyway, I'm digressing.

The USDA database has been massively helpful to me, and I highly recommend
it, just remember to test for yourself and get out there and walk after
your meals. It's good for you!

--
Siobhan Perricone
Humans wrote the bible,
God wrote the rocks
-- Word of God by Kathy Mar

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 13:57:10 GMT, hahabogus > wrote:

> A biggie question I have concerns the SR-17 USDA downloadable nutrition
>guide stand alone database (for Access or excell)....what does carbohydrate
>(by difference) mean and how does this relate to the info on product boxes?

The first, most important thing to remember is that different people have
different reactions to different foods. So you need to spend a while (Frank
and I spent a good three or four months) experimenting with foods and how
they impacted your glucose levels. Because no matter what any dietician
tells you, the reality is, diabetes is different for everyone, and they can
give you general guidelines, but it's up to you to figure out your own
particular idiosyncracies.

For example, I can't really eat french fries much without walking a great
deal afterwards. They just hammer my glucose something terrible. But pizza
I have no problem with at all. Frank gets high readings on both fries and
pizza, but is able to eat more fruits than I am without much of a blip.

You learn what foods impact you through testing. When we first started
out, we tested first thing when we woke up (actually, we still do that
every day, your fasting glucose number is the best determination for how
well you're really controlling your diabetes). A fasting BG of under 130
should be a goal, though it's not likely you'll get there right off.

Then, if breakfast isn't right away, I'd test just before breakfast. Then
I'd eat breakfast and just as I started eating, set a timer for 2 hours.
Note what you had for breakfast, and how many carbs it has (more on this in
a minute 'cos it actually answers your question above). Test again when the
timer goes off, that tells you what your 2 hr post prandial BG is. This
should be under 130, if you've got good control (sorry, not sure what the
conversion for that is for you). This tells you how much the food you had
at breakfast has impacted your BG. You can repeat this process with every
meal for a while, testing after different foods and different activity
levels.

One trick Frank and I found is that if we walk steadily for 10 to 15
minutes around an hour after we eat, it greatly reduces our BG reading at 2
hours post prandial. Also, it gives you the exercise you're supposed to be
getting.

So about fiber. The reason I brought the other stuff up first is because
what I'm saying now is very much "YMMV". Generally speaking, the body
doesn't process fiber in the same way it processes other carbohydrates
(fiber is a carbohydrate, but it's not something we are able to digest
readily). As a result, grams of fiber carbs don't generally impact people's
blood glucose levels.

In the United States, they include the amount of fiber *with* the total
carbs on packaging. In Europe (and possibly Canada, I've not asked around)
the fiber grams are listed separately from the other carbohydrates. So if
the fiber is included in the total carbs on a package, subtract the grams
of fiber from the total grams of carbs and that gives you the "net carbs"
of the particular food. "Net carbs" is the amount of carbs that are most
likely to impact your BG. I've found it to work consistently as a rule of
thumb, and I don't find that fiber carbs impact my BG at all. But I've
read from other people that this rule of thumb doesn't work for them (I
have to admit a certain skepticism and suspicion that they might not be
testing on this properly, but I'm not in a position to say that for
certain), so that's why you need to do your own testing.

The fact is, the reason fiber is good to have is *because* it's not
digested. It's good for your colon because it helps clean things out. If
it's not digested, it never makes it to your blood stream, therefore it is
physically impossible for it to have a direct impact on your BG. Which is
why I'm not completely convinced that the people who claim fiber raises
their BG aren't confusing it with something else. That doesn't mean,
however, that there isn't something else going on with these individuals
that is leading to a spike that somehow corrolates to but is not caused by
the presence of fiber in a food item.

Anyway, I'm digressing.

The USDA database has been massively helpful to me, and I highly recommend
it, just remember to test for yourself and get out there and walk after
your meals. It's good for you!

--
Siobhan Perricone
Humans wrote the bible,
God wrote the rocks
-- Word of God by Kathy Mar