# Time to dump outdated NHS misinformation



## Clive Phillips (Oct 13, 2016)

Since June I've lost two and a half stone, 5" from my waist, my cholesterol is exactly where it should be and my blood sugars have tumbled. I've gone from 50 units of insulin twice daily to 10 or less and I've never had as much energy; oh, and I'm 68 years old!
I found dietdoctor.com and it blows all the NHS "low fat blah blah blah" right out of the window! No ridiculous calorie counting and I get to drink red wine and whiskey!
The government hate the website because no matter how they try they can't discredit it. They roll out the same old clueless "Experts" to spew out the tripe they've been preaching for years even though they're proved wrong time and time again.
So, unless you want to remain on the same old merry go round take a look; unless you have the most expensive thing in the world; a closed mind!


----------



## Martin Canty (Oct 13, 2016)

Welcome to the forum Clive....

I think that generally this group agrees that lower carbs are better.....


----------



## Clive Phillips (Oct 13, 2016)

I'm sure they do but most will be following the usual calorie counting, low fat blah that doesn't work.


----------



## Ljc (Oct 13, 2016)

Quite a lot of us on here do LCHF , I don't do LC but I have cut down an awful lot and full fat everything.


----------



## Owen (Oct 13, 2016)

Clive Phillips said:


> Since June I've lost two and a half stone, 5" from my waist, my cholesterol is exactly where it should be and my blood sugars have tumbled. I've gone from 50 units of insulin twice daily to 10 or less and I've never had as much energy; oh, and I'm 68 years old!
> I found dietdoctor.com and it blows all the NHS "low fat blah blah blah" right out of the window! No ridiculous calorie counting and I get to drink red wine and whiskey!
> The government hate the website because no matter how they try they can't discredit it. They roll out the same old clueless "Experts" to spew out the tripe they've been preaching for years even though they're proved wrong time and time again.
> So, unless you want to remain on the same old merry go round take a look; unless you have the most expensive thing in the world; a closed mind!


Are you here to promote this website?


----------



## Clive Phillips (Oct 13, 2016)

Ljc said:


> Quite a lot of us on here do LCHF , I don't do LC but I have cut down an awful lot and full fat everything.


I find it easy to cut out the carbs. My practice nurse is delighted with my progress and I expect to be off insulin by next summer and to have reversed my diabetes soon after that. I wish dietdoctor had been around 50 years ago!


----------



## Owen (Oct 13, 2016)

Clive Phillips said:


> I find it easy to cut out the carbs. My practice nurse is delighted with my progress and I expect to be off insulin by next summer and to have reversed my diabetes soon after that. I wish dietdoctor had been around 50 years ago!


So it is so wonderful that you are still on insulin. Hmmm


----------



## Martin Canty (Oct 13, 2016)

Clive Phillips said:


> I'm sure they do but most will be following the usual calorie counting, low fat blah that doesn't work.


Hang around on this board a while, you would be surprised.


----------



## Mark Parrott (Oct 13, 2016)

Most of us are aware of Diet Doctor & follow the LCHF way of life.  I think you maybe preaching to the converted.


----------



## Clive Phillips (Oct 13, 2016)

Owen said:


> So it is so wonderful that you are still on insulin. Hmmm


What a stupid comment! I've been doing this since June! Yup, enjoy your closed mind!


----------



## trophywench (Oct 13, 2016)

What about the folk as yet people treated as T2 but who will be re-classified later as LADA?  There are thousands like that since they don't do all the tests on the vast majority of folk.  Perhaps you were lucky and had all the tests at the outset.

Nothing on God's earth could currently make their diabetes reversible.

Come back when you've studied diabetes for years like many of the people here have, and see if you still think Owen's comment was 'stupid'.  A bit catty perhaps, Owen,  but not stupid by any means!


----------



## Martin Canty (Oct 13, 2016)

Clive Phillips said:


> Type 2 can be reversed


You say reversed, I say controlled..... Even if well controlled there is always a risk of increasing insulin resistance or the disease developing further; that's why we are all vigilant about what our numbers are & how foods (even previously "safe" foods) affect our numbers.


----------



## trophywench (Oct 13, 2016)

Where do I say I believe everything the NHS website says about T2 - when I don't believe everything they - or the individuals working for it - say about a lot of other things either.

However my own 'closed mind' detector is currently beeping it's little head off !  LOL  I wonder why that could be?


----------



## Ralph-YK (Oct 14, 2016)

Clive Phillips said:


> Incidentally, it was this website that stated ""Most breakfast cereals are fine;"


Sorry. Which site?  Do you mean this forum we are posting on?  You're going to have to much more specific and clearer than "this website".
And this forum doesn't.


----------



## Redkite (Oct 14, 2016)

Strictly speaking, type 2 cannot be reversed, only controlled.  It is possible to improve control to the point where injected insulin is no longer necessary (ie you would have improved your body's insulin sensitivity due to weight loss and regular exercise, and/or reduced the demand on your pancreas for insulin by reducing carb intake).  However this is NOT a reversal in the true sense, because the moment you begin eating carbs again or decrease your activity levels, your pancreas will again be unable to cope.


----------



## Northerner (Oct 14, 2016)

Hi Clive, welcome to the forum  I applaud you on your efforts in turning things around - well done  Please don't assume though that the members of this forum are ignorant of your path to success, I think if you took a little time to read other people's experiences you would realise that it's not a revelation to many (if, indeed, any). Please don't use abusive and inflammatory language when referring to others - fine to discuss your findings, but keep it civil.

About half of our members are Type 1, so whilst there can be advantages in reducing carb intake, it's not essential and won't 'reverse' anything. Similarly, not everyone needs to go to low carb/high fat extremes to get their levels under control - the key is finding the right plan for you as an individual (which you appear to have found for yourself).


----------



## Ralph-YK (Oct 14, 2016)

It sounds like your doing well Clive in managing your diabetes. Keep it up.


----------



## Lilian (Oct 14, 2016)

Outdated NHS misinformation seems to apply across the board.   I have pernicious anaemia and hypothyroidism as well as diabetes and I have found the NHS is living on another planet  with those conditions as well.    And those are the ones I know about.


----------



## Matt Cycle (Oct 14, 2016)

I'm not sure what point the OP is trying to make exactly.  Great, dietdoctor works for him but to suggest some sort of government conspiracy against it is ridiculous.  I'm quite sure the government are more than aware of the obesity crisis and Type 2 diabetes epidemic from the billions they have to pour into the NHS to deal with it each year.  I would presume they are investigating all avenues to try and do something about it.  They can't just say do something based on what a few people on the internet have claimed without it being properly investigated, which takes time.


----------



## Ralph-YK (Oct 14, 2016)

Matt Cycle said:


> ...some sort of government conspiracy...


I listened to a couple of radio programmes and podcasts about conspiracy theories.  They said a government conspiracy isn't needed in a lot of the examples.  Officals and politicians are not perfect. All it requires is incompetence.
I've had Diabetec dieticiens and Nurses I've met in person disagree.  One commented "well I don't know why she said that" of another.


----------



## Lilian (Oct 14, 2016)

Follow the cash and it will give you your answers.     All the big food manufacturers are geared for low fat.    It is much cheaper to manufacture low fat products than low carb as the higher fat will have to be accompanied by more and better proteins.  As they cannot use chemical preservatives the shelf life of products without so much sugar will be shorter too.      The food chains and pub chains also produce high carb foods because it is cheaper.   Plus most people out there have still got the low fat mind set so it will mean more advertising.   It is only the likes of us who have a problem that have been forced to think about nutrition.   I have a friend who has no health problems and thinks nothing of having a plate of chips for lunch.   I heard two women talking and even now one was warning the other about eating too many eggs (too many being more than 4 a week).   So even the mind set of politicians and even doctors are still set on low fat (based on Ansel Keys flawed science).       The more people becoming diabetic the more people will start to be aware that type 2 diabetes is helped by a lower carb diet.    That is if they are allowed to have testing equipment of course.   I would have thought it was plain common sense.    You do not need insulin for fat, you do not need insulin for a reasonable portion of protein, but you do need insulin for carbs.    I daresay the pharmaceutical companies have a rather large sway too.    What would doctors advise type two's to do if the NHS stopped all medication for them.   Would they still advocate basing meals on carbohydrates?   And if not then, why now?


----------



## Northerner (Oct 14, 2016)

Ralph-YK said:


> They said a government conspiracy isn't needed in a lot of the examples. Officals and politicians are not perfect. All it requires is incompetence.


That's very true. I see it as incompetence that, when my 78 year old Aunt was diagnosed Type 2 all she received was a surgery 'compliments' (!!!) slip and a diet sheet that was so old it might well have been written on vellum or papyrus


----------



## Martin Canty (Oct 14, 2016)

Lilian said:


> The more people becoming diabetic the more people will start to be aware that type 2 diabetes is helped by a lower carb diet


I would like that but unfortunately I think that we are in a vast minority in the aggressive way that we try to control D, most people would follow the standard advice without thinking further....


----------



## Lilian (Oct 14, 2016)

I once read that it is generally considered in the medical profession (or it was then) that there was no point in trying to change the eating habits or lifestyle of newly diagnosed diabetics who are of a certain age.    First they do not want to cause more stress or frighten the patient.   Secondly they do not think the patient would be able to change their eating habits or lifestyle after all those years and Thirdly as complications take several years to manifest by the time the elderly patient gets complications they would be getting age related health problems anyway.


----------



## Lilian (Oct 14, 2016)

Do you remember when the WHO (world health organisation) were going to put out a statement (round the world) saying sugar was very bad for you, the sugar producers and manufacturers threatened them that if they did that,  they would withdraw their donations.    As the WHO received massive donations from these people they were put in a very difficult position.    They ended up withdrawing their statement.       There was a lot of publicity about this at the time so the message did get out there in a roundabout way.


----------



## Ralph-YK (Oct 14, 2016)

Oh, there is the general medical thing of no patient involvement. That's why they don't tell us things.


----------



## Lilian (Oct 14, 2016)

Ralph-YK said:


> Oh, there is the general medical thing of no patient involvement. That's why they don't tell us things.


They have now got to get used to being more open with patients - by law (Data Protection Act 1998 - Not Freedom of Information Act as one would have thought).    We should now all be able to see our test results, and other information on line as well as be able to make appointments etc.   There was a deadline to make this available to patients by last April.    They do not like patientsseeing their own test results in case they ask questions about why the GP said they were fine when various results are out of range.    The GMC have said that doctors are supposed to work with the patients and therefore they cannot any longer not involve the patient.    Mind you there are a lot of people who would pefer not be involved or know.


----------



## Robin (Oct 14, 2016)

Lilian said:


> They have now got to get used to being more open with patients - by law (Data Protection Act 1998 - Not Freedom of Information Act as one would have thought).    We should now all be able to see our test results, and other information on line as well as be able to make appointments etc.   There was a deadline to make this available to patients by last April.    They do not like patientsseeing their own test results in case they ask questions about why the GP said they were fine when various results are out of range.    The GMC have said that doctors are supposed to work with the patients and therefore they cannot any longer not involve the patient.    Mind you there are a lot of people who would pefer not be involved or know.


Ah, I thought there was a deadline that had passed. I asked about online test results etc when I went into our surgery yesterday, and was met with blank looks. One of the receptionists eventually volunteered the info that she'd heard of it, but the practice manager hadn't got round to doing anything about it! At the moment, the only thing we can do is order repeats on line.


----------



## Northerner (Oct 14, 2016)

Robin said:


> Ah, I thought there was a deadline that had passed. I asked about online test results etc when I went into our surgery yesterday, and was met with blank looks. One of the receptionists eventually volunteered the info that she'd heard of it, but the practice manager hadn't got round to doing anything about it! At the moment, the only thing we can do is order repeats on line.


Sounds familiar, they're dragging their feet at my surgery too


----------



## Lilian (Oct 14, 2016)

My surgery were also procrastinating.    However I reported them to england.patient-online@nhs.net giving the name and address of the surgery.    They had a word with them and within a few weeks it had been put online.


----------



## Northerner (Oct 14, 2016)

Lilian said:


> My surgery were also procrastinating.    However I reported them to england.patient-online@nhs.net giving the name and address of the surgery.    They had a word with them and within a few weeks it had been put online.


Ooh! Thanks for the tip @Lilian!


----------



## Vicsetter (Oct 14, 2016)

Lilian said:


> They have now got to get used to being more open with patients - by law (Data Protection Act 1998 - Not Freedom of Information Act as one would have thought).    We should now all be able to see our test results, and other information on line as well as be able to make appointments etc.   There was a deadline to make this available to patients by last April.    They do not like patientsseeing their own test results in case they ask questions about why the GP said they were fine when various results are out of range.    The GMC have said that doctors are supposed to work with the patients and therefore they cannot any longer not involve the patient.    Mind you there are a lot of people who would pefer not be involved or know.


Where did you get that from? - the data protection act does not tell anyone to provide data on-line and is not specific to any organization processing personal data.  
Who is the 'they' you refer to? if you ask your surgery you should be given your test results, by law.


----------



## Mark Parrott (Oct 14, 2016)

So, if I phone my surgery, can the receptionist give me my cholesterol breakdown?  Don't want to talk to the poison dwarf again.


----------



## Robin (Oct 14, 2016)

Vicsetter said:


> Where did you get that from? - the data protection act does not tell anyone to provide data on-line and is not specific to any organization processing personal data.
> Who is the 'they' you refer to? if you ask your surgery you should be given your test results, by law.


I can ask my surgery for the results, i.e, face to face, and they'll give them to me, this would be so I can look them up on line, without having to trek into the surgery ( OK, it's only 100yds down the road for me, but getting the receptionist's attention, and then to understand what you want takes a lot of time and energy). Plus, my GP has been known to forget to change the date after my annual medication review, so even though I've just seen her, I've had problems getting my repeats. It would be nice to be able to check on line if she's actually done that before I submit my next prescription.


----------



## Robin (Oct 14, 2016)

Mark Parrott said:


> So, if I phone my surgery, can the receptionist give me my cholesterol breakdown?  Don't want to talk to the poison dwarf again.


We can get our results by phone, once the doctor has checked them and marked them Ok, so I don't see why not.


----------



## Vicsetter (Oct 15, 2016)

Robin said:


> We can get our results by phone, once the doctor has checked them and marked them Ok, so I don't see why not.


Only if the full cholesterol test has been performed, my GP only does total and trig as the hdl/ldl split costs more money.


----------



## Lilian (Oct 15, 2016)

Vicsetter said:


> Where did you get that from? - the data protection act does not tell anyone to provide data on-line and is not specific to any organization processing personal data.
> Who is the 'they' you refer to? if you ask your surgery you should be given your test results, by law.


No it is not the online thing.     It is about the patient being allowed to see and have copies of their test results and copies of letters between consultant and doctor.


----------



## Vicsetter (Oct 15, 2016)

QUOTE: As of 31 March 2015, practices are required to offer registered patients in England online access to summary information from their medical records (provided the practice has the necessary computer systems in place).

The key words here are in brackets, you can read the full article here: https://www.themdu.com/guidance-and...ce/online-access-to-patient-records-your-faqs
You may note that it is up to the surgery to determine what are summary data.

I would also like to point out that some people in England assume that NHS England rules apply to the whole of the UK.. This is definitely not the case (which is why we in Scotland key free prescriptions and free eye sight tests).


----------



## Lilian (Oct 15, 2016)

Some surgeries there is no problem with giving copies of test results, but others are very reluctant to, and even charged patients for this whatever they felt like charging, even though they were not supposed to make a profit out of it.     It is always good to have a copy of your test results because many a patient has been informed that they are OK when in fact they are not.    I have had to challenge the doctor more than once.


----------



## Vicsetter (Oct 15, 2016)

Lilian said:


> No it is not the online thing.     It is about the patient being allowed to see and have copies of their test results and copies of letters between consultant and doctor.


Thats not what you wrote.  
I am not at all sure that you have the right to see letters between consultant and GP, that will be at the GPs discretion.


----------



## Lilian (Oct 15, 2016)

[QUOTE=" if you ask your surgery you should be given your test results, by law.[/QUOTE]    That law is the Data Protection Act 1998 - prior to that it was not law and doctors did not let you see any of your test results or records etc.


----------



## Lilian (Oct 15, 2016)

Vicsetter said:


> Thats not what you wrote.
> I am not at all sure that you have the right to see letters between consultant and GP, that will be at the GPs discretion.


  See
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/dclinpsy/training-handbook/chapters/handbook-pdf/appendix8 - copying letters to patients - Introduction 1.1


----------



## Lilian (Oct 15, 2016)

Robin said:


> We can get our results by phone, once the doctor has checked them and marked them Ok, so I don't see why not.


Well while you are feeling well and the doctor tells you over the phone everything is OK that is fine.    The time you really want to SEE your test results is when you are feeling really ill and the doctor tells you that you are OK.     It will be an eye opener.


----------



## Robin (Oct 15, 2016)

Lilian said:


> Well while you are feeling well and the doctor tells you over the phone everything is OK that is fine.    The time you really want to SEE your test results is when you are feeling really ill and the doctor tells you that you are OK.     It will be an eye opener.


Agree, it would be so much better if our surgery pulled its finger out and signed up to EMIS for the full package, not just prescriptions. In the meantime, I insist on getting a print-out of my results, so I can look at all the figures,( which is fine for me because I'm fit enough to call in at the surgery, I know some people aren't)


----------



## Northerner (Oct 15, 2016)

About 6 years ago (I think) I was handed a booklet at my diabetes review which was intended as a record of all my numbers from test results. Since then, I have only been given the numbers I specifically ask about, and sometimes that's like pulling teeth  Why bother giving me a booklet then trying for some bizarre and unknown reason to withhold the information I'm supposed to be recording? I'm pretty sure that, by now, I know more about what those numbers mean than the person hiding them from me


----------



## grovesy (Oct 15, 2016)

Northerner said:


> About 6 years ago (I think) I was handed a booklet at my diabetes review which was intended as a record of all my numbers from test results. Since then, I have only been given the numbers I specifically ask about, and sometimes that's like pulling teeth  Why bother giving me a booklet then trying for some bizarre and unknown reason to withhold the information I'm supposed to be recording? I'm pretty sure that, by now, I know more about what those numbers mean than the person hiding them from me


The record  book I was given over 13 years ago was one from one of the drug companies! Not specific to my kind treatment!


----------



## Northerner (Oct 15, 2016)

grovesy said:


> The record  book I was given over 13 years ago was one from one of the drug companies! Not specific to my kind treatment!


This was supposed to be a new initiative specifically for Type 1 diabetics though, to prompt us to know and understand our numbers better, there was just absolutely no follow-up so a complete waste of time and money


----------



## grovesy (Oct 15, 2016)

Vicsetter said:


> QUOTE: As of 31 March 2015, practices are required to offer registered patients in England online access to summary information from their medical records (provided the practice has the necessary computer systems in place).
> 
> The key words here are in brackets, you can read the full article here: https://www.themdu.com/guidance-and...ce/online-access-to-patient-records-your-faqs
> You may note that it is up to the surgery to determine what are summary data.
> ...


That is intresting about necessary computer systems!  Mine had a new system installed last year and for 3 months during the change over to the new system, they stopped normal clinics, bloods and booked in advance appointments! 
It still took them till recently to have the online patient access but not the full package!


----------



## Vicsetter (Oct 16, 2016)

Lilian said:


> See
> https://www.ucl.ac.uk/dclinpsy/training-handbook/chapters/handbook-pdf/appendix8 - copying letters to patients - Introduction 1.1


You seem to be confusing peoples 'Rights' and Dept of Health(2002 ish) guidelines


----------



## Lilian (Oct 16, 2016)

Vicsetter said:


> You seem to be confusing peoples 'Rights' and Dept of Health(2002 ish) guidelines


I think guidelines are the nearest one can expect with that.    Most doctors abide by guidelines.


----------



## Northerner (Oct 16, 2016)

Lilian said:


> I think guidelines are the nearest one can expect with that.    Most doctors abide by guidelines.


A lot of doctors treat them as tramlines!


----------



## trophywench (Oct 17, 2016)

Not all surgeries use the same web system for patient info - EMIS is one and there are two others according to something I was reading a while ago.  Some are more capable than others - the one my surgery use so far has appointments, repeat scrips and allergies on it (so the latter's blank for me LOL) and yes they were all 'supposed' to have test results available and furthermore the hospitals as well as GP surgeries were all 'supposed' to have a system for T1s too for test results to enable us to consider the numbers before we got face to face with the main man (or lady) to save everyone time if nowt else - but obviously they haven't bothered.  Thing is of course - it will take extra time for somebody somewhere in order to actually do it - so they just don't.

It infuriates me because in the whole of Scotland they have a web system 'My diabetes - My way' where everything about your D is available - and everybody absolutely loves it so it obviously works really really well - and can't be that much trouble else it wouldn't be so well used and folk would keep having probs with it - so why the hell can't England Wales and Ireland just use THAT? 

There's no need to re-invent any wheels, FFS.  Economies of scale - the more that use it, it has to become proportionately cheaper for everybody too, surely!


----------



## Northerner (Oct 17, 2016)

Couldn't agree more Jenny. Looks like you have the same paltry system as me


----------



## grovesy (Oct 17, 2016)

My surgery the system is called system online, and I only get the same information you do Jenny!
It can't be CCG thing  either as I regular lunch with someone who has whole access thing at a different surgery in same area!


----------



## Robin (Oct 17, 2016)

Ours is the EMIS system. The surgery introduced the online repeats bit of it a couple of years ago, and the forms they produced said they would eventually be widening it to appointments, test results etc, but they don't seem to have got round to it. But judging by the vegetation growing out of the guttering all round the building ( it was newly built about fifteen years ago) there's quite a lot of things they don't get round to.


----------



## Matt Cycle (Oct 17, 2016)

Ours is EMIS as well.  I can do online repeats and book certain appointments but can't see test results.  The EMIS page states please speak to your surgery for this facility.  When I enquired at the surgery about this they said we're hoping to get that part up and running soon.  That was months ago.


----------



## Mark Parrott (Oct 17, 2016)

Northerner said:


> Couldn't agree more Jenny. Looks like you have the same paltry system as me


Mine's the same.  Appointments & repeat prescriptions only.


----------



## trophywench (Oct 17, 2016)

grovesy said:


> My surgery the system is called system online, and I only get the same information you do Jenny!
> It can't be CCG thing  either as I regular lunch with someone who has whole access thing at a different surgery in same area!



Ours called 'Patient Services' now, not 'Vision Online' and you need a password a yard and a half long now also, in order to access yourself.


----------



## grovesy (Oct 17, 2016)

It seems as if there are multiple systems, my password has to be long too! I also get an email to say someone has accessed!


----------



## ChrisSamsDad (Oct 20, 2016)

Ralph-YK said:


> I listened to a couple of radio programmes and podcasts about conspiracy theories.  They said a government conspiracy isn't needed in a lot of the examples.  Officals and politicians are not perfect. All it requires is incompetence.
> I've had Diabetec dieticiens and Nurses I've met in person disagree.  One commented "well I don't know why she said that" of another.


Yes, that's true, and incompetency takes a lot less effort. Also of importance is political will - current efforts of politicians regarding the health of the country seem to be focused on making money out of it.


----------



## Gooner9 (Oct 30, 2016)

Clive Phillips said:


> Since June I've lost two and a half stone, 5" from my waist, my cholesterol is exactly where it should be and my blood sugars have tumbled. I've gone from 50 units of insulin twice daily to 10 or less and I've never had as much energy; oh, and I'm 68 years old!
> I found dietdoctor.com and it blows all the NHS "low fat blah blah blah" right out of the window! No ridiculous calorie counting and I get to drink red wine and whiskey!
> The government hate the website because no matter how they try they can't discredit it. They roll out the same old clueless "Experts" to spew out the tripe they've been preaching for years even though they're proved wrong time and time again.
> So, unless you want to remain on the same old merry go round take a look; unless you have the most expensive thing in the world; a closed mind!


Thanks, any other websites you want to promote? PPI perhaps?


----------



## Northerner (Oct 30, 2016)

Gooner9 said:


> Thanks, any other websites you want to promote? PPI perhaps?


He's left the forum...


----------



## Ralph-YK (Oct 30, 2016)

Northerner said:


> He's left the forum...


*sigh* It's a pity. I know, not a good start. I would have been interested how things worked out for him.


----------

